RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03630 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry code (RE) 2X (First-term, second-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under SRP) be changed to allow him to reenlist. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He requests his RE code be changed because the record is unjust. He is trying to rejoin the Air Force but is ineligible because of his RE code. He was honorably discharged under the DOS Rollback. He was handpicked for a deployment to Kunsan AB, South Korea. He was chosen because of his hard work and dedication. While there, he was interrogated regarding synthetic cannabis also known as spice. He admitted to using spice on 31 November 2009 with other Airmen. He was later separated as part of the DOS roll back. He was told he would have the opportunity to rejoin so he took the punishment without a fight. He understands using spice was wrong, but it was a mistake. He would like his hard work and dedication to make a positive impact. If given this chance he will not let anyone down and will be completely grateful. In support of his appeal, the applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, excerpts from his master personnel record, a copy of his REDD Report, a list of references and a copy of his completed background check. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 March 2009. He was separated on 31 August 2010 as a part of the Air Force Force Shaping Program. His service was characterized as honorable and his RE code was listed as 2X. He was credited with 1 year, 5 months and 1 day of active duty service. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. While there is no AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, in the applicant’s file, it was confirmed that he was on the Force Shaping Roll Back list. All members on the Roll Back list were non-selected for reenlistment which required the 2X RE code. It was also confirmed the member was on a Control Roster and had an Unfavorable Information File. The applicant has not provided any evidence of an error or injustice that warrants a change to his RE code. The complete DPSOA evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 October 2011, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 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 are not persuaded by the evidence submitted in his appeal that a change in his RE code is warranted. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility, and adopt is rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03630 in Executive Session on 23 February 2012 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Oct 11, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Nov 11.