RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-03744
INDEX CODE:  108.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX			COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “3E” (second-term or career airman who refused to get retainability for training or retraining or declined to attend PME), be changed to allow him to continue his career in the Air Force.  
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misinformed when he was selected for retraining in 2007 under Phase II of the Noncommissioned Officer Retraining Program (NCORP) when leadership advised him that he did not need to complete section two of the retraining application since he was on a 3-year controlled tour with the Tactical Response Team (TRT).  However, this information was incorrect and his RE code was subsequently changed to “3E” and he was not allowed to reenlist or change duty stations.  

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter of support.  

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the military personnel data system, the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) with a date of rank of 1 October 2005.  He has a Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 8 September 1999 and a projected date of separation of 19 June 2008. 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are presented in the Air Force Evaluation at Exhibit B.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPSOA recommends the applicant’s request be denied.  DPSOA states the NCORP is a multi-purpose, two phase program designed to rebalance the enlisted force by moving noncommissioned officers (NCOs) from career fields with overages to those skills experiencing shortages; and to provide NCOs with a voice in their career development.  The applicant failed to submit his retraining application in accordance with program guidance; therefore, the “3E” RE Code is correct.  Even though he was aware of his vulnerability for not submitting an application as outlined in the announcement message, he accepted the advice of a junior enlisted airman and opted not to apply.  According to the documentation submitted on behalf of the applicant, he was informed to “fill out the package but not follow-up with EPRs or other required documents;” however, there is no evidence he ever initiated a retraining application.  Contrary to the assertions in the cited memorandum of support, the Air Force did not offer the applicant cross-training into the Military Working Dog (MWD) Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) after he failed to submit the completed application by required deadline of 28 February 2007.  In fact, the MWD AFSC was one of only two AFSCs he was eligible to select retraining into during Phase I, or be involuntarily retrained under Phase II.  Additionally, the applicant contends he is on an assignment code which restricts him from a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) for three years from his hire date.  As shown on the military personnel data system (MilPDS) report on individual personnel (RIP) supplied by this office, there is no such code placed on him by the Air Force.  Although his unit or major command may prevent him from volunteering for any duty for a period of three years, this local requirement does not take precedence over an Air Force directive to balance its enlisted force.  The applicant’s attempt to move into the technical school instructor position was a viable option only during Phase I as stated in the announcement message.  Upon the implementation of Phase II, Air Force needs decided the career paths for NCOs that failed to volunteer and take an active role in their careers.  Volunteer actions are not considered during Phase II.  

It is DPSOA’s opinion that there is no evidence of error or injustice in this case.

The DPSOA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He is not saying that his RE code of “3E” is incorrect or that there was any error on the part of the Air Force; however, he was never properly informed about the retraining situation, he was given inaccurate information about his assignment and its conditions, he was never properly advised or counseled on his role in the application process, and he was given poor advice from a superintendent on the appropriate actions to be taken.  Therefore, he should not be punished for these miscommunications.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice.  In this respect, the applicant was selected for retraining under the involuntary stage of the NCORP.  Individuals identified under this stage were required to submit a completed retraining application and associated documentation in order to process the retraining.  Having been selected for the involuntary phase of retraining, the applicant contends he and his supervisor relied on guidance from appropriate personnel in the Commander’s Support Staff (CSS), regarding his requirement to submit a retraining package.  Although the NCORP Phase II message clearly indicates what documents were required in the retraining package, we believe that the applicant was misinformed by the CSS, and in good faith, believed he had completed all actions required on his part.  After reviewing the evidence of record, most notably his years of honorable service in the Air Force, and his desire to continue his career, we believe in the interest of justice his records should be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 28 February 2007, his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code was 1M.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 15 May 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-03744 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Nov 07, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 3 Dec 07, w/atchs.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jan 08.
     Exhibit D.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, not dated.