RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01504
                                       INDEX CODE:  108.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 November 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “3E” (second-term  or  career  airman
who refused to get retainability for training or retraining or  declined  to
attend PME), be removed from his records.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was given conflicting information  with  regard  to  the  Noncommissioned
Officer Retraining Program (NCORP).  The Air Force only  targeted  20  staff
sergeants in his Air Force Specialty Code  (AFSC)  for  retraining-out.   He
was  number  30  of  30  staff  sergeants  identified  as   vulnerable   for
involuntary retraining.  On  16  February  2007,  he  asked  the  Air  Force
Contact Center  (AFCC)  what  would  happen  if  he  did  not  complete  his
application before the deadline.  Their response was “this will open you  up
to the possibility of being retrained  into  a  career  field  not  of  your
choosing.”  Instead of being retrained into a career field not  of  his  own
choosing, he was assigned an RE code of “3E,”  denying  his  possibility  to
reenlist and not scoring his promotion  test  for  the  grade  of  technical
sergeant (E-6).

In support of his application, the  applicant  provides  NCORP  notification
and electronic transmissions, along with a copy of his leave form for  22-23
February 2007.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty  in  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant (E-5) with a date of  rank  of  1  June  2005.   According  to  the
military personnel data system, he  has  a  total  active  federal  military
service date of 10 October 2001 and a projected  date  of  separation  of  6
October 2009.

On 12 January 2007, the applicant signed a statement  acknowledging  he  had
been notified and counseled that he must retrain under the Fiscal Year  2006
NCORP.  As part of his acknowledgment of understanding  and  acceptance,  he
signed the  statement:   “I  understand  that  if  I  do  not  complete  the
requirements and submit a completed package for retraining  NLT  28 Feb  07,
AFPC will update reenlistment eligibility code “3E” and I  will  be  subject
to the administrative actions listed above.”  The referenced  administrative
actions on the statement included:

      a. Member  will  separate  on  DOS/ETS  and  will  be  ineligible  for
promotion/extension for  the  remainder  of  the  enlistment.   Furthermore,
identify reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “3E”  may  preclude  the  member
from enlisting in another branch  of  military  and  may  also  under  other
future force shaping initiatives.

      b. Member will be ineligible for  WAPS  testing  during  the  upcoming
promotion cycle.  If the member is determined to  have  declined  retraining
and has tested for promotion, the promotion test will not be scored.

      c. If the member elects to separate,  member  still  remains  eligible
for  any  PCS,  TDY,  or  training  for  which  the  member  has  sufficient
retainability.  If member is selected for Phase II retraining  and  has  the
necessary retainability, the member cannot decline retraining  IAW  AFI  36-
2626, Table 3.4, and rule 2.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPPAE recommends the applicant’s request be denied.  DPPAE  states  the
applicant failed to comply with NCORP requirements and as such, his RE  code
of “3E” is correct.  The applicant was aware of  the  requirements  and  did
submit an initial application under Phase II, but  failed  to  complete  the
requirements to submit a completed application.

DPPAE states the NCORP is a multi-purpose, two  phase  program  designed  to
rebalance the  enlisted  force  by  moving  NCOs  from  career  fields  with
overages to those skills experiencing shortages; and to provide NCOs with  a
voice in their career  development.   The  applicant  submitted  an  initial
retraining package on 17 January 2007 and on  5  February  2007.   The  AFCC
informed the applicant that there were no quotas in his requested AFSCs  and
to resubmit.  On 23 February 2007, the applicant again submitted  AFSCs  for
retraining.   Upon  receipt,  the  AFCC  advised  the   applicant   of   his
eligibility for the requested AFSC of 3E711, Fire Protection Helper, and  to
submit the required documents not later than 28 February 2007.  On 24  April
2007,  after  not  receiving  the   applicant’s   completed   package,   his
application was closed due to inactivity.

DPPAE states the applicant has failed to prove an error or injustice  exists
or any evidence of conflicting information.  To permit  removal  of  his  RE
code seriously undermines the program and most of all, is  unjust  to  those
that complied.  The applicant is one of  approximately  three  hundred  NCOs
that failed to take responsibility as members of the profession of arms  and
moreover, as noncommissioned officers in the Air  Force.   As  announced  in
the messages and the memorandum he signed on 12  January  2007,  failure  to
meet the deadline would be considered declined  retraining.   The  applicant
failed to  complete  his  retraining  application  under  Phase  II  of  the
program, although fully aware of the program requirements.

The DPPAE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He  has  maintained  an  impeccable  record  and  continually  distinguished
himself by being a loyal and dedicated follower of all  lawful  orders  from
his superiors, while applying himself to the highest standards  of  the  Air
Force.  His record speaks for itself.  The justice he is seeking  is  to  be
given the opportunity to either stay in his  present  career  field,  or  be
retrained into any career field the Air Force deems necessary.  His goal  is
to remain a member of the Air Force, and serve the  best  interests  of  the
Air Force.

The applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an injustice.  We took notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issues involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the  application  was
denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only  be
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant  evidence  not
considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 9 August 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. Terri G. Spoutz, Member
            Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2007-01504 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 May 2007, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 16 May 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jun 07.
      Exhibit D.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 7 Jul 07, w/atchs.




                                  MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                                   Panel Chair