RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01959
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NO
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Dec 22, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (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 (PME)) be removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was entered into the Noncommissioned Officer Retraining  Program  (NCORP)
Phase  II  Involuntary  Retraining  Program.   He  completed   the   initial
application to retrain on or about 16 Jan 07.  He did  not  receive  further
guidance regarding retraining.

He was under the impression that he was not being considered  and  would  be
able to continue in his current career field of 3E051  (civil  engineering).


No one in his chain of  command,  commander’s  support  staff,  or  military
personnel flight (MPF) was  notified  that  he  was  required  to  submit  a
retraining package.

He was  informed  of  his  ineligibility  to  reenlist  in  May  07  with  a
separation date in July 07.

He did apply for cross-training and the RE code is in error.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a letter from AF/A7CM.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was discharged on 28 Jul 07 in the  grade  of  staff  sergeant
(SSgt).

He was denied reenlistment based on a message from AFPC/DPPAET on 3  Jan  07
for failing to complete a retraining package as directed.

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


_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial  of  the  request.   The  applicant  failed  to
complete his retraining application under Phase II of the program,  although
fully aware of the program requirements.  To permit removal of his  RE  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 members of the profession of arms  and  moreover,  as
NCOs in the USAF.

The NCORP was 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, the Air Force Personnel  Center  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 from 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) would appear at the top  of  the  list).   The
Air Staff targeted 20 staff sergeants (SSgt) in this  applicant’s  AFSC  for
retraining-out and the applicant was number 34 on the list of vulnerables.

On 2 Feb 07 at 7:47 a.m., the Air Force Contact Center  (AFCC)  advised  the
applicant that he met the qualifications for the  requested  AFSC,  that  he
would receive a  separate  e-mail  identifying  the  documents  required  to
complete the application, and that the next step  would  be  to  submit  the
complete application.

On 2 Feb 07, at 7:50 a.m., the AFCC advised the applicant on the  additional
documents required (i.e.,  AF  Form  42,  last  three  enlisted  performance
reports (EPRs), etc.) for the completed application.

On 27 Feb 07, the AFCC sent a reminder to the applicant due  to  not  having
received the completed application.  In light  of  the  repeated  reminders,
the applicant’s assertion that he did not  receive  additional  guidance  is
inexplicable.

The applicant filed an inquiry through his Congressman on or  about  20  Jun
07, same subject.  Contrary to his statement on the DD  Form  149,  that  “I
did not receive any further guidance from AFPC  regarding  retraining,”  the
applicant was sent two separate e-mails within three minutes of  each  other
from the AFCC.  In the applicant’s statement to his Congressman, he  states,
“After talking with the Chief Enlisted Advisor  for  the  Civil  Engineering
Squadron (my squadron), I found out that this indeed  had  to  be  done.   I
applied for one job through the vMPF (virtual  Military  Personnel  Flight).
I later received an e-mail that said I had met all the requirements for  the
job I had chosen.”  The applicant’s  comments  to  his  Congressman  clearly
demonstrated he received the AFCC  communications—both  communications  were
sent within three minutes of each other.

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  3  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-2007-01959
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 6 Jun 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPAE Memorandum, w/atchs, dated 12 Jul 07.
    Exhibit D.  SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 3 Aug 07.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair