RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03037 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did not understand the meaning of his RE code until he met 
with a recruiter, and then confirmed the definition when he met 
with a Veterans Service Officer. 

 

He served honorably from 17 Dec 08 until 31 May 11, it was during 
his last four months of service that he made some bad choices and 
received an Article 15 for driving under the influence (DUI) and 
three Letters of Reprimand. He offers no excuses, and states his 
service prior to the incidents was unblemished. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge 
from the Armed Forces of the United States, and a copy of his DD 
Form 214, Certificate of Release and Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served in the Air Force from 17 Dec 08 until 31 May 
11. 

 

On 24 Feb 11, the applicant received an Article 15 for DUI. The 
commander imposed punishment which consisted of reduction to the 
grade of airman, forfeiture of $822.00 per month for two months, 
and a reprimand. The applicant did not appeal the punishment. 

 

On 1 Mar 11, the applicant was considered for reenlistment under 
the SRP; however, his supervisor did not recommend him for 
reenlistment based on his Article 15. The unit commander 


concurred with the supervisor’s recommendation and the applicant 
was not selected for reenlistment under the SRP. 

 

On 31 May 11, the applicant was honorably discharged and received 
an RE code of 2X. He served on active duty for a period of 
2 years, 5 months, and 14 days. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s RE 
code 2X is appropriate based on the applicant being denied 
reenlistment and having to separate from the military. 

 

DPSOS states that commander’s have selective reenlistment 
selection or non-selection authority, and the SRP considers a 
member’s enlisted performance report ratings, unfavorable 
information from a substantiated source, the airman’s willingness 
to comply with Air Force standards, and the airman’s ability (or 
lack of) to meet required training and duty performance levels. 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 16 Sep 11, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a 
response has not been received (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. 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 and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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 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 Docket Number 
BC-2011-03037 in Executive Session on 1 Dec 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 


 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 24 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Sep 11.