RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02457 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 changed to a 
1J (Eligible to reenlist but elected to separate). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The RE code of 2X does not properly reflect his honorable 
service. Although he was released under force reduction 
policies there was no reason to list his RE code as 2X. His 
performance was above standards. He has completed an 
engineering degree and a Masters of Business Administration 
(MBA). 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 31 Mar 86 separation and 
college transcripts. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 Aug 84 for 
a period of four years. 

 

The applicant was discharged, on 31 Mar 88, by reason of early 
separation program – strength reduction, with service 
characterized as honorable. He was credited with three years, 
seven months, and eight days of active duty service. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, stating, in part, the applicant 
did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that would 
warrant a change in his RE code. Additionally, the applicant 
had an opportunity to appeal his denial of reenlistment, but 
chose not to appeal the decision. 

 

DPSOA notes that the governing Air Force instructions states 
commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-
selection authority. The SRP considers the member’s Enlisted 
Performance Report (EPR) ratings, Unfavorable Information from a 
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 states "under the pretence of a force reduction there 
was no reason to list the above code" and that his duty 
performance was not in question. However, his duty performance 
is the reason he was denied reenlistment, requiring a RE code 2X 
and his discharge under the Early Separation Program - Strength 
Reduction was not the reason for the RE code 2X. 

 

The complete AFPC/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 26 Aug 11 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

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, the discharge and the assigned RE code 
appears to comply with the governing AFI and we find no evidence 
to indicate that his separation or his RE code of 2X were 
inappropriate. We find no evidence of error in this case and 
after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been 
submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe he 
has suffered from an injustice. Therefore, in view of the 
above, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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-2011-02457 in Executive Session on 29 March 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Aug 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair