RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02848
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry (RE) code of 2X (first-term, second term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the 
Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) be upgraded so that he can reenlist in the US Marine Corps (USMC).
________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has no intentions of reenlisting in the Air Force; however, by upgrading his RE code to a “1” he will be able to enlist in the USMC.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 Jun 10, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (AB/E-1).

On 11 Jan 12, he received Article 15 punishment for disobeying a lawful order.  On 1 May 12, his suspended punishment was 
implemented for being absent from work on 11 Mar 12, from 2300 to 2340.  The applicant's commander stated on his AF Form 
418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, dated 
2 May 12, that he had been counseled numerous times for being late to work and proper use of his chain of command.

On 29 Sep 12, the applicant was honorably separated with a reason for separation of completion of required active service, 
with a RE code of 2X, in the grade of AB.  He was credited with 2 years, 3 months, and 8 days of active duty service.

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  DPSOA states that the RE code of 
2X is correct.  

The applicant was separated under the AF Force Shaping Program 
after serving 2 years, 3 months, and 8 days with an honorable 
character of service.  On 2 May 12, the applicant's commander 
non-selected him for reenlistment.  On 3 May 12, the applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the non-selection and rendered his 
intent not to appeal.  

AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, states that commanders 
have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection 
authority.  The SRP considers the members Enlisted Performance 
Report (EPR) ratings, Unfavorable Information from any 
substantiated source, the airman's willingness to comply with 
Air Force standards and/or the airman's ability (or lack of) to 
meet required training and duty performance levels.  The 
applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in 
reference to his RE code, but wants to rejoin the military.  

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 23 Aug 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

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.  At the time 
members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the circumstances of their separation.  
The applicant’s RE code of 2X accurately reflects that he was considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP.  
Therefore, after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, and given the circumstances surrounding his separation, we find 
the RE code was issued in accordance with the governing directives and we find no basis to disturb the existing record.  
In view of the above and 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a 
personal appearance; and 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-2013-02848 in Executive Session on 3 Apr 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 13. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 18 Jul 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Aug 13.
1 2