RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02924
		INDEX CODE:  100.03
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he may reenlist in the Air Force.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not in constant trouble and received only a letter of reprimand, which was given for false reasons.  He was constantly degraded, threatened and told he was going to be kicked out for no reason.  At the time he was denied reenlistment, he fully understood that he would not be able to reenlist but now regrets the decision not to appeal.  During his outprocessing the squadron leader told him that he could get the RE code changed but would have to give up his permissive TDY and stay in Phoenix for another month.  At that time, he had already terminated his lease and rented and packed a moving truck to go back to Kansas City.  He would like his RE code changed so that he may reenlist and be able to provide stability and structure for his new family and himself and rejoin the unity and camaraderie that the military has to offer.  He would also like to take advantage of the money given so he may be able to obtain a college degree.  He understands that these reasons are small but feels that the military is where he belongs.

In support of his request applicant provides a personal statement, copies of letters of support and a copy of his recommendation for promotion to senior airman.  

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 January 1997.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 9 May 1998.  He received three Enlisted Performance Reports (EPR) closing 28 October 1998, 28 October 1999 and 28 October 2000, in which the overall ratings were 3*, 2*, and 3 respectively (highest rating a 5).  * Denotes referral EPR.

On 5 October 1999, applicant’s supervisor prepared an AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer Status Consideration, and recommended that he not be selected for reenlistment.  The specific reason for his action was that the applicant’s past enlisted performance rating was a referral EPR and his personal information file contained numerous disciplinary actions.  He was continuously unable to follow basic safety instructions in a career field that demands safety being the forethought of any action and strict adherence.  He had a history of negative involvement with various law enforcement agencies around Luke AFB.  He failed to complete his upgrade training through his career development course in the allotted time and was forced to file for an extension in order to complete the required training.   On 7 October 1999, applicant’s section commander concurred with the recommendation and rendered him ineligible for reenlistment.  

Applicant was honorably discharged on 8 January 2001, after serving 4 years on active duty.  An RE code 2X (First-term airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP) was given.  
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP recommends the application be denied.  DPPRSP states that the applicant has not satisfactorily indicated the commander’s action to deny reenlistment was inappropriate or not in compliance with Air Force Policy.  

The DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 17 January 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment.  As of this date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 warranting correction of his RE code.  In view of his overall record while in the Air Force, we are not persuaded that he has been the victim of either an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find his uncorroborated assertions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence by the applicant indicating the information cited by his supervisor and commander to nonselect him for reenlistment was erroneous or that those individuals abused their discretionary authority, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 16 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Oct 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 6 Jan 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jan 03.