RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-03851

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2X (first-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) be changed to allow his reentry in the military.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reason of his honorable discharge was justly deserved.  He was young and immature, not ready for the responsibilities faced by young airmen.  Over the past 2.5 years, he has matured, and learned from his previous errors that led to his discharge.  Additionally, he has vastly improved his skills (dental lab technician), and is involved with military programs, to include the Honor Flights for WWII veterans.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 8 Mar 11.

On 16 Nov 12, the applicant was rendered an enlisted performance report (EPR) for the period 8 Mar 11 thru 8 Nov 12, with an overall performance assessment rating of “3”.  

On 27 Mar 13, the applicant was not recommended for reenlistment.

On 28 Mar 13, the applicant was not selected for reenlistment due to substandard duty performance to include a pattern of behaviors that failed to comply with Air Force Standards.  He was on the Control Roster/UIF and scheduled to be separated under the Date of Separation (DOS) Roll Back Program.  

On 29 Mar 13, the applicant rendered his appeal of the 28 Mar 13 decision.  

On 7 May 13 the Appeal Authority denied the applicant’s appeal.

On 31 May 13, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 2 months, and 23 days of active service.   

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’s commander non-selected him for reenlistment on 28 Mar 13.  The applicant’s RE code was updated to 2X--(First-term, second- term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP) based on his non-selection for reenlistment. 

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 5 Apr 16 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.  The Board notes that according to AFI 36-2606 (dated 9 May 2011) Reenlistment in the USAF, individuals with an Air Force RE Code “2” in the first position means ineligible for immediate reenlistment, however, are not precluded from enlisting in the Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard or another military service if a waiver is issued.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

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 issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

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-2015-03851 in Executive Session on 21 Jul 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03851 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jul 15, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 11 Jan 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Apr 16.