RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02525 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code be changed from “2X” (First-term, second- term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) to one that will allow him to enlist into another service. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. In Jan 12, he volunteered and was selected for a short tour overseas assignment to Kunsan Air Base, Korea. However, three days prior to his departure (November), his commander ordered him to take the Fitness Assessment (FA) test. He was not scheduled to take the FA prior to his departure. In fact, he was not supposed to take the test until he got to his new duty station. He was under a lot of intense scrutiny by senior non- commissioned and commissioned officers; therefore, due to the pressure, he failed the test and was placed on the control roster. His orders to Kunsan were cancelled and he was given 90 days to retest. He was told that if he failed the retest, the Air Force would begin the discharge process, but if he successfully completed the test, he would be removed from the control roster. 2. In Jan 13, he passed the retest with a 79.6 percent score, but was not taken off the control roster. At that point the Air Force began the Roll Back program and he was not selected for retention due to being on the control roster. While he has had some difficulty passing the FA test, he has shown that he can pass the test and maintain his personal physical fitness. He is also an expert in his career field and was a valued asset to the Air Force. He strongly believes that he can be an asset to the Armed Forces and to the United States of America. He is simply requesting that his RE code be changed so that he can continue to serve his country. 3. He joined the Air Force in 2010 and became an egress technician to help maintain one of the most incredible man-made wonders, the B-2 Spirit. He successfully completed his upgrade training with a final score of 84 percent and completed two FTD classes for the T-38 and B-2 egress systems that enabled him to complete any task assigned. He contributes to his community by donating blood, volunteering for the Relay for Life and the March of Dimes, and contributing to squadron functions. He is also working on his Associates Degree. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 2 Nov 10. According to the applicant’s AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, Remarks Section reflects the following: He is currently on a Control Roster, Reenlistment Eligibility Code 41, he missed appointment, lied to an NCO, failed to go to commander directive Viper Fit, second PT failure, failed to properly perform a tool box inspection, third PT failure, and missed appointment for which he received several Letters of Reprimand, Letters of Counseling, a Unfavorable Information file was established and he was placed on the Control Roster. On 4 Mar 13, the applicant’s commander non-selected him for reenlistment. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s intent. He appealed to the commander; however, his request was denied. He received a narrative reason for separation of “Non-Retention on Active Duty” and an RE code of “2X”. The applicant received an honorable discharge on 31 May 13 after serving 2 years, 6 months, and 29 days on active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial stating that it is clear the applicant had numerous disciplinary infractions for which would clearly authorize his commander to keep him on the control roster. Furthermore, passing the FA test is not grounds for automatic removal from the control roster. The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice with regard to his RE code. His non-selection for retention was processed in accordance with current guidance. The complete 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 30 Aug 13 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 an error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we believe the RE code issued was in accordance with governing instructions. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02525 in Executive Session on 6 Feb 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 May 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 30 Jul 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 13. Chair