RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00753 INDEX CODE:	110.02
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 to allow him entry into the Ohio Air National Guard (ANG).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was told by his supervisor that he could join the Ohio ANG.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 12 Aug 03 and served for a period of four years.

On 14 Jun 06, the applicant’s supervisor initiated an AF IMT Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, (Non- Recommended). The supervisor stated the applicant’s lack of initiative and motivation had seriously affected his job performance and that he had no desire to excel, attain the required duty competence, or become reliable and trusted to carry out assigned duties, and that his lack of initiative had been addressed on numerous occasions through performance feedbacks and verbal counselings.

On 20 Jul 06, the commander concurred and non-selected the applicant for reenlistment. The applicant was honorably discharged on 11 Aug 07.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant did not appeal his non-selection for reenlistment nor did he provide any documentation showing his RE code was in error or unjust.

The complete 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 28 Mar 08 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has not received a response.

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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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- 2008-00753 in Executive Session on 10 June 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair Member
Member
The	following	documentary	evidence	was	considered	for	Docket Number BC-2008-00753:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, w/atch, dated 23 Feb 08. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 6 Mar 08. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Mar 08.