RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01930
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Dec 22, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment (RE) code of 3E (second term or career  airman  who  refuse
to get retainability  for  training  or  retraining  or  decline  to  attend
professional military education) be removed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The initial auto-response from the Air Force  Personnel  Center  (AFPC)  was
sent to an old e-mail address on 9 Jan 07.

He has been stationed at Mt. Home since May 06.

The initial information that he received  did  not  state  what  made  up  a
“complete package” and he did not receive that information until 31 Jan 07.

The information he received stated to retake the Armed  Services  Vocational
Ability Test (ASVAB) in order to score higher on the  general  section,  but
it did not specify what to do if the scores were not sufficient  enough  for
jobs he elected for retraining.

A specialist was  not  assigned  to  the  base  to  answer  questions  about
retraining.

There was not enough information provided to him  in  order  to  complete  a
package.

In support of his request, the applicant provided e-mail  correspondence,  a
virtual  military  personnel  flight  (vMPF)  printout,  and  a  letter   of
recommendation from his superior.

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

_________________________________________________________________




STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 9 Jan 07, the applicant submitted an initial retraining  application  and
AFPC  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  applicant’s  request  for  retraining.
Documentation indicates the response from AFPC was sent to  the  applicant’s
former e-mail address at Yokota.

On 10 Jan 07, the applicant signed  a  statement  indicating  he  understood
that if he did not complete his retraining application no later than 28  Feb
07, AFPC would update his  RE  code  to  3E  and  he  would  be  subject  to
administrative actions.

On 31 Jan  07,  the  applicant  was  notified  by  AFPC  through  e-mail  of
retraining options and requirements as well as provided contact  numbers  if
there were any questions about his request.  The  e-mail  was  sent  to  the
applicant’s correct address.

On 24 Apr 07, the applicant contacted AFPC and  was  informed  that  he  had
been identified as declining retraining under  the  Noncommissioned  Officer
Retraining Program (NCORP) Declination Policy and advised to appeal  to  the
AFBCMR.

Other relevant facts are outlined in the AFPC/DPPAE opinion at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial of the applicant’s request.   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.

On  26  Jul  06,  AFPC  announced  implementation  of  the  FY07  NCORP  and
identified over 3,000  NCOs,  by  order  of  vulnerability,  susceptible  to
retraining.  In the announcement message, NCOs  were  asked  to  voluntarily
apply for retraining into an  Air  Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC)  of  their
choice during Phase I (voluntary) of the program that ran 26 Jul to  18  Sep
06.  If voluntary targets were not met in any AFSC, Phase  II  (involuntary)
would be implemented.  Phase II was implemented and ran from 3 Jan 07 to  31
May 07.  All vulnerable NCOs identified as vulnerable in Phase I were  given
until 15 Jan 07 to submit an initial request, followed by a suspense  of  28
Feb 07 to submit a complete application.  Selection of vulnerable  NCOs  was
made across all  eligible  year  groups,  mirroring  assignment  eligibility
(i.e., sorted by date of rank; those with the  least  time  in  grade  (TIG)
appeared at the top of the list).  Air  Staff  targeted  40  SSgts  in  this
applicant’s AFSC for retraining-out and the applicant was number 10  on  the
list of vulnerables.

The applicant clearly failed to take  actions  as  directed  and  discussion
threads clearly show no error or injustice.  He signed and  dated  the  FY07
Phase II NCORP Memorandum which clearly stated the 28 Feb  07  suspense  and
the requirement to submit all documents by that  date.   The  applicant  has
failed to prove an error or injustice exists and  there  is  no  alternative
solution available.  To permit removal of  this  code  seriously  undermines
the program and most of all, is unjust  to  those  that  complied  and  were
selected for involuntary retraining because of his inaction.  The  applicant
is one of approximately 300 NCOs that failed to  take  responsibility  as  a
member of the profession of arms and moreover as a NCO  in  the  Air  Force.
The applicant’s own inaction placed him in the  predicament  and  therefore,
the RE Code of 3E is correct.

The AFPC/DPPAE complete evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17  Aug
07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
not received a response.

_________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  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.

_________________________________________________________________

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  Docket  Number  BC-2007-01930
in Executive Session on 6 November 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Jun 07.
    Exhibit B.  AFPC/DPPAE Memorandum, w/atchs, dated 9 Jul 07.
    Exhibit C.  SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 17 Aug 07.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair