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.