RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01262

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from “2X” to a favorable code that will allow his reentry into the Armed Forces.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since he received an honorable discharge and was awarded the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM), he should be eligible for reenlistment.

The applicant states that although he received an Article 15 for late payment of his Deferred Payment Plan, the punishment as pertained to his reduction in grade was suspended, and he had no other administrative punishments.  At the time, he had an approved Career Job Reservation (CJR); however, after receiving the Article 15, it was taken away.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits his personal statement, copies of his Enlisted Performance Report (EPRs) and performance feedback worksheets.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 August 1994, for a period of four years in the grade of airman first class (E-3).  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4).

On 20 November 1997, his supervisor did not recommend him for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP).  His supervisor indicated that for the last year, the applicant had continuously failed to meet Air Force standards as indicated by the following:

	a.	A December 1996 letter of notice of impending involuntary collection action due to a 60-days delinquent DPP account.

	b.	Letters of Counseling (LOC), dated 20 March 1997, 13 and 28 May 1997, 23 July 1997, and 25 September 1997, for speeding on base, reporting 45 minutes late for work, failure to obey technical data while repairing an AIM-9 missile, missing a scheduled training appointment, and again reporting late for work by 10 minutes.

	c.	A Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 2 October 1997, for sexually harassing a dependent daughter of another military member, resulting in the established of an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) and placement on the Control Roster.

	d.	An Article 15 imposed on 17 November 1997, for failure to pay a debt, for again being notified of involuntary collection action due to a 60-day delinquent DPP account, for which his punishment was a suspended reduction to the grade of airman first class.

On 3 December 1997, the commander did not select him for reenlistment under the SRP.

He was honorably discharged on 23 August 1998, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) and issued an RE Code of 2X (First term, second term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP).  He completed four years of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the RE code of “2X” is correct.  It identifies the fact that at the time of his discharge he was considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP.

The AFPC/DPPA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 July 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  However, as of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction.  It is clear that the decision to separate the applicant was proper based on his situation at the time.  The RE code which was issued at the time of his discharge accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation, i.e., considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP.  Accordingly, we do not find this code to be in error or unjust.  We therefore conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number BC-2003-01262 in Executive Session on 23 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 03.