RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01955
		INDEX CODE:  110.00, 100.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed to allow eligibility to reenlist in the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not “put out” of the Air Force.  He made a mistake by getting out of the Air Force and would like to reenlist, but he has the wrong RE code.

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, copies of his DD Form 214 and an expired Air Force identification card.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 13 January 1999 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with an effective date and date of rank of 13 January 2002.

Applicant's Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:

		Period Ending	Evaluation

		  28 Sep 00	3 - Consider for promotion (grade of E-3)
		  28 Sep 01	3
		* 28 Sep 02	2 - Not Recommended (grade of E-4)

*Referral EPR

On 16 September 2002, the applicant was not recommended for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) by his supervisor/rater.  He was nonselected for reenlistment by his commander due to his behavior and financial irresponsibility.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the nonselection for reenlistment on 17 September 2002 and, on 20 September 2002, he indicated that he intended to appeal the decision.  However, the applicant’s appeal was not received by the appeal date, which was 30 September 2002.

The applicant was honorably discharged on 12 January 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (completion of required active service).  He had completed a total of four years and was serving in the grade of senior airman (E-4) at the time of discharge.  He received an RE Code of 2X, which defined means "First term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP."

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS states that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied.  DPPAE states that the applicant was denied reenlistment by his commander per AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, on 16 September 2002.  The applicant has a history of disciplinary problems such as failure to pay his just debts off-duty and other instances of financial irresponsibility.  The RE code is illustrative of the applicant’s status at the time of his discharge from the Air Force.  The RE 2X code is correct.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and indicated that he received a “raw deal” while serving in the Air Force.  He had a few stumbling blocks, but he overcame them.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  Applicant’s supporting documents were thoroughly reviewed.  However, these documents failed to convince us that the applicant was the victim of an error or injustice with regard to the actions which transpired during his military career.  Applicant’s RE code of 2X accurately describes the circumstances of his separation; i.e., he was denied reenlistment eligibility through the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP).  In his denial of reenlistment, the unit commander made reference to applicant’s financial irresponsibility and that his behavior resulted in disciplinary actions.  In addition, we noted that the applicant’s Enlisted Performance Reports made reference to his financial irresponsibility, which resulted in two Letters of Reprimand, an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) and correctional custody.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his nonselection for reenlistment was contrary to the governing Air Force instruction in effect at the time or that it was based on erroneous information.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust, we find no basis to disturb the existing record.

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 our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 25 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01955.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 May 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Jul 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 11 Aug 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Aug 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 10 Sep 03.