RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-03120

	COUNSEL:  NONE
	
	HEARING:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed to allow him to join another branch of service, and he receive all pay and allowances from his time of discharge to his original date of separation.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He appealed his non-retention decision under the Selective Reenlistment Program.  As a second term Airman, the appeal authority was the Wing Commander; however, his appeal was reviewed and denied by his Group Commander.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force Staff Sergeant.  Applicant’s initial application to the Board was received on 29 Jan 15, but was returned to him on 10 Feb 15, due to failure to identify an error or injustice, and lack of signature.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP3ST recommends denying the application.  While acknowledging the applicant’s appeal was not denied at the appropriate level, DP3ST opines his disciplinary infractions were such that they believe the Wing Commander would have also denied his appeal.  Additionally, the application is untimely.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/JA recommends denying the application.  The proper appellate authority should have been the Wing Commander; however, considering the facts stated on the AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, it is difficult to conclude the Wing Commander would have reached a different decision from the Group Commander.  There is no evidence his nonselection for reenlistment was “unjust” within the meaning of 10 USC 1552, as defined by the courts.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 12 Jun 17 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationales and recommendations of AFPC/DP3ST and AFPC/JA and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-03120 in Executive Session on 29 May 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 25 Jul 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 4 Nov 16.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/JA, dated 11 Jan 17
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 12 Jun 17.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document, Docket Number BC-2016-03120, constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.