RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03842 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him reentry into the Air National Guard (ANG).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He took an early out because he had back problems that were giving him issues in physical fitness. He took advantage of an early out so he would not be kicked out of the military. His back issue is now corrected and he would like to join the ANG. He doesn’t know why his RE code is not allowing him to reenter the military.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The  applicant  initially  entered  the  Regular  Air  Force  on
28 Aug 07.
According to the applicant’s AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, dated 17 Nov 11, he was non-recommended for re-enlistment by his supervisor as a result of a quality force review conducted IAW the FY12 Enlisted DOS Rollback PDSM 11-94. The commander concurred with this recommendation on 17 Nov 11.

The applicant did not appeal the commander’s decision.
On 31 Mar 12, the applicant was discharged honorably, and was credited with four years, seven months, and three days of active service and was issued an RE code of 2X (1st term, 2nd term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment).

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, states commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority. The Selective Reenlistment Program (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 chose not to appeal his non-selection for reenlistment and the RE code 2X is correct based his non-selection. The applicant contends he had back problems which caused him issues with passing his physical fitness and took an "early out" instead of being kicked out. However, the Rollback is not a voluntary program but forces members who are selected based on negative quality indicators to separate by a predetermined date. In the applicant's case he had to separate by 31 Mar 12 and could not have stayed in the Air Force if he wanted to. Additionally, members that fail physical fitness for a recognized medical issue verified by the Medical Group are  not kicked  out. Members on a physical profile are excused from being tested if the competent medical authority believes the medical condition warrants a profile.

A complete copy of the 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 23 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

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-2014-03842 in Executive Session on 14 May 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03842 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 12 Sep 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Oct 14. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Feb 15.