RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2021-00440

XXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE	

	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

1.   His denial of reenlistment be removed from his record.  

2.   His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflect his correct Primary Air Force Specialty Code (PAFSC) and time served in his PAFSC (ADMINISTRATIVELY CORRECTED).     

3.  He be granted a medical retirement based on his Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) service-connected compensable disability rating.  

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He was denied reenlistment without justification.  He was betrayed by his unit and any recruiter that looks at his paperwork states it appears his commander did not like him.  He was subjected to harsh treatment for pointing out to his colleagues they were not following technical orders and were incorrectly accomplishing their work.  He also suffered from anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other conditions and received an 80 percent service-connected disability rating from the DVA.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force staff sergeant (E-5).

The applicant received a referral enlisted performance report (EPR) for the period ending 31 Jan 15 for failure to meet minimum fitness standards.

The applicant’s records include AF Forms 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve/Air National Guard, dated 7 Dec 15 and 9 Feb 16 showing he was denied reenlistment for sub-par performance, lack of professionalism and need for close supervision.  

On 12 Feb 16, the applicant was honorably released from active duty with Reentry (RE) code “2X” (First Term, Second Term, or Career Airman non-selected for reenlistment) and narrative reason for separation of “Non-Retention on Active Duty”  He served 8 years and 14 days of active duty service.  

The applicant provides a letter from the DVA dated 14 Oct 20 providing a summary of his benefits, which states he had a combined service-connected rating of 80 percent with an effective date of the last change to current rating of 1 Feb 20.  The DVA summary of benefits does not include the conditions or effective dates of the rating decision.  

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY/GUIDANCE

The military Disability Evaluation System (DES), by law under 10 U.S.C., can only offer compensation for those service incurred diseases or injuries which specifically rendered a member unfit for continued active service and were the cause for career termination.  The DVA under 38 U.S.C., is empowered to offer compensation for any medical condition with an established nexus with military service, without regard to its impact upon a member’s fitness to serve or the length of time transpired since discharge.  Accordingly, a service-connected disability rating from the DVA does not automatically entitle a military service member to a medical discharge.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denial.  The applicant was denied reenlistment eligibility on 7 Dec 15, which meant he would have to separate on his date of separation (DOS) of 12 Jan 16.  He acknowledged the non-selection and rendered his intent to appeal the decision.  The AF Form 418 reflects his appeal was not received within 10 days as required.  

The applicant was also placed on administrative hold for being under investigation at some point before his DOS.  His DOS was extended for one month to 12 Feb 16 to allow for completion of the investigation. Upon his release from investigation, he was required selective reenlistment program (SRP) consideration to determine the appropriate RE code to be updated.  His commander non-selected him for reenlistment on 9 Feb 16, the applicant acknowledged the non-selection and rendered his intent not to appeal the decision.   The AF Form 418 dated 7 Dec 15 in his records is obsolete and has no affect.  It will be removed and replaced with the AF Form 418 dated 9 Feb 16.   

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 26 May 21 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSM and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions to warrant removal of his nonselection for reenlistment.  In this respect, the applicant contends he was denied reenlistment without justification; however, based on the evidence, it appears he was denied reenlistment due to his sub-par duty performance.  Moreover, he acknowledged the nonselection of reenlistment and did not submit an appeal of the decision.  The applicant also states he should have been medically retired based on his DVA Rating decision; however, he is not automatically entitled to a medical retirement based solely on receiving a DVA service-connected compensable disability rating.  Further, he has provided no evidence his denial of reenlistment was the result of any medical conditions or that he was diagnosed with any unfitting medical conditions while in service.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years of discovering the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  While the applicant asserts a date of discovery within the three-year limit, the Board does not find the assertion supported by a preponderance of the evidence.  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, aside from the correction of his PAFSC on his DD Form 214, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2021-00440 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 21:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
,Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 14 Oct 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, w/atchs, dated 25 May 21.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 26 May 21.
Exhibit E:  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3DW, w/atch, dated 8 Jun 21.
Exhibit F:  Notification of Administrative Correction, SAF/MRBC, dated 22 Jun 21.  

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