Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01913
Original file (BC 2014 01913.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01913

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2X” (First-term, 
second-term or career airman considered but not selected for 
reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program) be 
changed so he may reenter the military.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged for failing his Career Development Course 
(CDC) tests; however, at that time, he was distracted from 
preparing for testing because his pregnant wife got into a car 
accident.  He further contends he can prove his ability to now 
pass CDC tests due to the fact he’s maintained a 4.0 grade point 
average at two vocational schools and has earned his Airframe 
and Powerplant (A&P) license.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 11 Mar 93, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air 
Force.

On 10 Mar 97, the applicant was separated upon completion of 
required active service, with an honorable character of service, 
an RE code of 2X, and was credited with four years of active 
service.

On 22 Sep 00, the applicant was honorably discharged from the 
Air Force Reserve.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum 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 an injustice.  In accordance with AFI 36-2606, 
Reenlistment in the USAF, commanders have selective reenlistment 
selection or non-selection authority.  The Selective 
Reenlistment Program (SRP) considers the member’s Enlisted 
Performance Report (EPR) ratings, Unfavorable Information from 
any substantiated source, the airman's willingness to comply 
with Air Force standards and/or the airman's ability (or lack 
thereof) to meet required training and duty performance levels.  
While the applicant’s AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment 
Program Consideration, non-selecting him for reenlistment could 
not be found in his personnel record, nor was one provided by 
the applicant, his official record had indicators of substandard 
performance that would provide his commander the justification 
to non-select him for reenlistment.  Specifically, the referral 
AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, ending 10 Nov 95, 
states the applicant could not grasp many technical principles 
of his primary duties and failed his CDC tests twice.  
Additionally, the applicant’s lack of progression in rank is 
another indicator his performance may not have been to the 
acceptable standard to obtain his commander’s recommendation for 
reenlistment.  Normally, an E-3/A1C is promoted to E-4/SrA at 
three years of service.  Based on the applicant’s date of rank 
of 11 Jul 94, it appears he was not promoted with his peers and 
there is no documentation of a demotion in his record.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged 
error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, 
United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction    
36-2603.  Applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the 
delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises 
issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the 
merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of 
justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely 
manner.  

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the 
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as 
untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01913 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:





The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01913 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 18 Aug 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00009

    Original file (BC 2014 00009.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 24 Jan 14, for a period of three years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial with respect to the applicant’s request for his lost time to be reinstated. A complete copy of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00033

    Original file (BC 2009 00033.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant contends that none of the evaluators were members of the Air Force. In accordance with AFR 39-62, Noncommissioned Officer and Airman Performance Reports, when none of the evaluators are Air Force personnel, an Air Force advisor must sign the report. Even if the reasons for the delay in filing are insufficient to excuse the delay, we may examine the facts and circumstances of the case and, if substantial evidence of error or injustice exists, waive the three year time limit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04792

    Original file (BC 2013 04792.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 03589

    Original file (BC 2014 03589.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. The medical records provided by the applicant are noted; however, he has not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05133

    Original file (BC 2013 05133.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05133 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code 2X (first-term or second-term or career airman not selected for reenlistment) be changed. He was honorably discharged on 31 March 2012 after serving 5 years, 5 months and 7 days. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05688

    Original file (BC 2013 05688 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05688 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code “4I” which denotes “Serving on Control Roster” be changed. On 18 Apr 07, he was honorably discharged from active duty with an RE code of “4I” and narrative reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service.” He...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03842

    Original file (BC 2014 03842.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to the applicant’s AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, dated 17 Nov 11, he was non-recommended for re-enlistment by his supervisor as a result of a quality force review conducted IAW the FY12 Enlisted DOS Rollback PDSM 11-94. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02503

    Original file (BC 2014 02503.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02503 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reentry (RE) code of “2X” (1st term, 2nd term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to allow her to reenter the military. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00157

    Original file (BC 2014 00157.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00157 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code of 2X, which denotes "First Term, Second Term, or Career Airman nonselected for reenlistment” be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG). According to AF Form 418, dated 8 May 2013, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was not recommending him...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03414

    Original file (BC-2011-03414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial stating, in part, the applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change of his RE code. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation. ________________________________________________________________ The...