RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01533

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His reenlistment (RE) code, 5E (Ineligible to reenlist because Air Force Member has been denied reenlistment based on unsatisfactory participation/performance, attitude, bearing, or behavior), be changed to allow him to reenlist.

2.  He receives points and time lost due to wrongful disqualification of service.

3.  His training records be upgraded to reflect successful completion of 7-skill level Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) correspondence course.

4.  The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 30 May 08 thru 29 May 10 be removed from his records.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The intentional and unprofessional acts of individuals within his unit harmed his career.

He was not in an active component; he was an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA).  He never received a skill level review in Mar 07.  He was approved to attend 7-skill level technical training in May 07, but was later told he would have to reschedule due to needs of the unit.  His First Sergeant was told he could not attend training due to a family emergency.  He did not have a family emergency.  He was not informed that the technical training would be only offered by correspondence after the May 07 class.

His 2008 EPR reflects he successfully completed 7-skill level correspondence courses.

He provided all his medical and dental documentation and should not have been placed in a no pay or points status.  He was told not to report in Mar 10 without documentation.

In Mar 10, he submitted the necessary paperwork to renew his security clearance, and informed the Security Manager that he had been a victim of identity theft.  He called monthly to check the status of his clearance and was told it was being processed.  Finally, in Sept 10, he received notification that his commander had established a Security Information File (SIF) as of 1 Mar 10.  He was not aware that his commander had established a SIF.  He contacted the Air Force Central Adjudication Facility (AFCAF) and after providing the necessary documentation his clearance was restored.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 5 Jul 97, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Air Force Reserve.

On 4 Jun 10, the applicant received a referral EPR for failure to meet the minimum upgrade required for his Primary Air Force Specialty Code (PAFSC) and exceeding the maximum time in training for skill level upgrade.

On 2 Feb 13, the applicant was released from his, then, current assignment and honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve, with an RE code of 5E, Ineligible to reenlist because Air Force Member has been denied reenlistment base on unsatisfactory participation/performance, attitude, bearing, or behavior.

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:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.

The applicant contends that airmen acted unprofessionally and intentionally harmed his career.  As a result, he is requesting his RE code be changed to reflect that he is eligible to reenlist.  The applicant has not supplied any documentation to support his request.  The specific reasons the applicant was denied reenlistment are not available due to the time that has lapsed since his discharge.  However, according to AFI 36-2612, Reenlistments and Extensions, an AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, would have been required to be completed and the service member would be notified by the commander of the nonselection and required to sign and date the form.  The service member has the right to appeal the decision to the Military Personnel Section (MPS) by the next scheduled Unit Training Assembly (UTA) after the date they were notified or the service member forfeits their right to appeal.  The service member can appeal to either the Senior Reserve Commander or to an Appeal Board, the final decision is made in writing. 

AFRC/A1K does not support changing the applicant’s RE code.  He has not provided any documentation to substantiate his case.  Per the AFI, he would have had the opportunity to appeal the decision at that time and there are no documents located in the applicant’s records to verify his argument other than his discharge order stating he was not selected for reenlistment.

The applicant also believes points and time lost should be restored due to wrongful disqualification of service.  According to documents supplied, the applicant had not met the physical standards requirement on more than one occasion which placed him into a no pay and no point status until he completed the required documentation.  The applicant received copies of memorandums from the 512 AMDS on 2 Jul 10 and 20 Jan 12 that stated he was not in compliance with medical/dental standards set forth in AFI 48-123, Medical Standards and AFI 36-2254v1, Reserve Personnel Participation, which caused him to be placed in a no pay and no points status until meeting these requirements.  He responded to the 2 Jul 10 memorandum on 12 Aug 10.  He did not supply a response for the 20 Jan 12 memorandum.  However, he supplied the medical documentation which indicated the required action was taken care of on 22 Aug 12.  Nevertheless, during this lapse in time the service member is required to stay in a no pay and no points status and may not participate. 

According to the applicant’s participation records, he did not participate in any military duty after 26 Feb 10.  Also, based on the letter the applicant provided, dated 9 Sep 11, the 512 AMXS/CC initiated involuntary reassignment to the non-participating individual ready reserve (IRR) due to his failure to obtain a security clearance, change in manpower authorization and failure to retrain or seek reassignment.  This letter also denied the applicant from taking part in any pay or point gaining activities pending the decision of the involuntary reassignment.  The applicant sent certified mail to the 512 AMXS/CC on 30 Sep 11 referencing his security clearance and change in manpower authorization, which was well after the initial requests for documentation pertaining to the security clearance on 7 Feb 09 and 12 Jun 10.  

AFRC/A1K non-concurs with the applicant’s request to restore points and time lost.  The unit provided documentation and memorandums to him identifying the actions that needed to be taken to maintain his medical/dental readiness and security clearance and he failed to provide all of the requested information in a timely manner, which resulted in the denial of any pay or point gaining activities.

The applicant also believes his training records should be updated to reflect a seven skill level, however, he was aware this action was not taken based on the 4 Jun 10, letter regarding his referral EPR.  The referral EPR was rendered due to his failure to meet the minimum upgrade requirement for the PAFSC and for exceeding the maximum time in training for the upgrade.  The supervisor followed processing procedures per AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, and proof of mail notification to the applicant is in his record and he was afforded the opportunity to respond or rebut the EPR within 30 days of receipt but failed to do so.  

This also applies to the applicant’s request to remove the 2010 EPR in which he claims he did not know the rater.  However, records show that the rater on the EPR had been assigned to the unit since June 2008 and the applicant had the opportunity to respond or rebut the referral EPR the rater completed.

AFRC/A1K non-concurs with both requests to upgrade training records to reflect the seven skill level and removal of the 2010 EPR due to the fact the applicant was notified and failed to respond.

In summary, the applicant’s RE code appropriately reflects he was not selected for reenlistment and therefore no change is required.  Furthermore, his points record reflects his inability to gain points were due to his failure to provide the requested documentation to reinstate him to a participation and pay status.  The applicant’s AFSC skill level is appropriately reflected as a five skill level, as his records do not reflect completion of required training and he did not submit documentation showing he completed the training.  Lastly, the EPR in question is valid, the rater/supervisor was assigned to the unit at that time and the applicant had due process to rebut the report at that time.

A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K, evaluation, with attachment 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 Mar 16, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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 an 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 OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested 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-2015-01533 in Executive Session on 26 Apr 16, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
		, Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-01533 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jan 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFRC/A1K, dated 29 Feb 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Mar 16.