RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02205
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reentry Code (RE) of 2X (1st term, 2nd term or career airman
considered but not selected for reenlistment) be changed to 3V
(Separated w/Vol Sep Incentive) so he can enlist in the Utah Air
National Guard.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He accepted an early separation date of 1 Oct 06 when his
original separation date was 23 Apr 07. While he was
outprocessing the clerk was new and made a mistake by changing
his Separation Code from KND (Failed to Obtain Retainability) to
LBK (Involuntarily Discharged at End of Active Duty Obligated
Service). His RE Code should be 3V because he received Half
Separation Pay as a result of his early separation and was
transferred into the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for a term of
3 years. He would not have been accepted into the IRR if his RE
Code of 2X was correct.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty, and paperwork related to his IRR status.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_______________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty on 23 Apr 97.
On 20 Apr 06, the applicants supervisor chose not to recommend
the applicant for reenlistment, noting he had a referral
Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) on file for 2005 and had not
shown any improvement, he had numerous Letters of Counseling
(LOCs)/Letters of Reprimand (LORs) during the past year, and had
made it extremely clear he had no intention of reenlisting. The
applicants commander did not select him for reenlistment,
making him ineligible for reenlistment.
On 1 Oct 06, the applicant was released from active duty with an
Honorable service characterization, and was credited with nine
years, five months, and nine days of active service.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of
an error or injustice which would warrant correcting the record
to allow the applicant to reenlist. AFI 36-2606 states
commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-
selection authority. The Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)
considers the members EPR ratings, unfavorable information from
any substantiated source, the Airmans willingness to comply
with Air Force standards and/or the Airmans ability (or lack
of) to meet required training and duty performance levels. The
applicants supervisor recommended he not be eligible for
reenlistment, and the applicants commander denied him
reenlistment eligibility based on the applicants pattern of
non-compliance, referral report with no improvement, and
numerous LOCs/LORs. The applicant appealed and his appeal was
denied on 29 Aug 06. His non-selection required he receive an
RE Code of 2X per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the US Air Force,
Chapter 3. The applicant did not receive a separation bonus or
separate under the Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI) program
as he is suggesting. At the time of the applicants separation
there was no VSI program to apply for, and separating under VSI
is the only way to get an RE Code of 3V. He received $13,571.87
in separation pay based on being forced out of the Air Force and
having over 6 years of service. He did not have a choice to
reenlist or stay in the Air Force.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 6 Aug 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As
of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was untimely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.
The applicants commander denied him reenlistment eligibility.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no basis to recommend granting the relief.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-02205 Executive Session on 10 Oct 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-02205 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Apr 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 2 Jul 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02189
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02189 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. The raters comments state Member elected not to provide comments to the referral memo dated 24 Nov 2010. On 18 Feb 11, the applicants squadron commander did not select her for reenlistment stating she had received an Article 15 for drawing a sexual innuendo...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04792
She had an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), a referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to follow a direct order and several Letters of Counseling (LOC) for her work performance. The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to her RE code. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01103
On 23 May 12, his supervisor signed the AF IMT 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, indicating he was not recommending him for reenlistment due to his duty performance and multiple disciplinary issues. On 14 May 12, his supervisor presented him with an AF IMT 1058, Unfavorable Information File Action, notifying him that he intended to place him on the control roster for his duty performance and multiple disciplinary...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03836
However, his chain of command fabricated two additional LORs in order to involuntarily dismiss him from the military, and then denied his reenlistment in Mar 12. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03589
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03589 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be amended as follows: His separation code JBK which denotes Completion of Required Active Service be changed. The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A. The medical records provided by the applicant are noted; however, he has not...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04879
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04879 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code 2X (First-term, second-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) be changed to a 1 series. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02220
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02220 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Code (RE) be changed so he can get back into the Air Force and continue his service. According to the applicants AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, dated 1 Jun 12, his commander denied him reenlistment because he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01988
Any duty that requires him to report his arrest for DUI violates his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. On 10 Oct 12, the applicants commander issued him an LOR for failing to report his arrest to his security officer as required by DoD Regulation 5200.2-R, paragraph C9.1.4. On 11 Mar 13, in response to a request from the applicant, his referral EPR was amended to remove reference to the DUI, however, the EPR remained an overall 3 based upon the applicants failure to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05478
The applicant contends all his disciplinary actions should have been purged after six months; however, he received three MFRs, two LOCs, and four LORs for disciplinary actions during his last reenlistment period and commanders should consider all infractions that occurred on the current reenlistment when determining reenlistment eligibility. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-05478 in...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01474
On 3 Jul 12, AFPC/DPSOA requested the applicant provide the documents she contends were added to her appeal package without due process. On 24 Jul 12, in response to DPSOA’s request, she stated after submitting her appeal package to the Force Support Squadron, she inquired about the status and was informed her unit had provided additional documentation (i.e. LOC, dated 7 Sep 11, LOC, dated 3 Nov 11, and a LOR, dated 2 Mar 12) to legal for their recommendation to the group commander. The...