RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04106 

COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did nothing to warrant this unfavorable RE code on his DD Form 
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD 
Form 214. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
served on active duty from 3 February 2009 to 31 May 2011. 

 

On 23 December 2010, the applicant received Article 15 punishment 
for wrongfully requesting a member of the Fitness Assessment Cell 
to falsely add six more sit-ups to the sit-up component of his 
fitness assessment, conduct which was of a nature to bring 
discredit upon the Armed Forces and was prejudicial to good order 
and discipline. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $200 
pay, 20 days extra duty (of which five days were remitted without 
further action), and a reprimand. 

 

On 15 February 2011, the applicant’s supervisor non-recommended 
him for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program 
(SRB). On 17 February 2011, the applicant’s commander non-
selected him for selective reenlistment. The applicant 
acknowledged his non-selection and rendered his intent to appeal; 
however, he did not submit an appeal package. 

 

The applicant was honorably discharged effective 31 May 2011, in 
the grade of airman first class (E-3), after serving 2 years, 
3 months and 28 days on active duty. His DD Form 214 reflects 


his RE code as “2X” and a narrative reason for separation as 
“Completion of Required Active Service.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant was 
separated under the Fiscal Year 2011 Force Shaping Rollback 
Program. His non-selection for reenlistment was a result of his 
own actions, as annotated on his AF Form 3070A, Record of 
Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings (AB thru TSgt) and AF IMT 418, Selection Reenlistment Program Consideration, dated 23 December 
2010 and 17 February 2011, respectively. The applicant does not 
provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE 
code. 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 16 December 2011, for review and comment within 30 days. As of 
this date, this office has received no response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 that 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. 

 

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 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04106 in Executive Session on 7 June 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04106: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Jul 11, w/atch. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 6 Dec 11. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Dec 11.