RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00657 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reentry (RE) code of 2X, which denotes "1st term, 2nd term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the selective reenlistment program (SRP)," be changed to 3K, which denotes “Reserved for Use by AFPC or AFBCMR,” to allow her reentry into the Air Force. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While she was on active duty she made changes within herself and should have been given another chance. An Air Force recruiter submitted a waiver package so she could reenlist, however, it was denied. In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; AF Form 931, Performance Feedback Worksheet (AB thru TSgt); AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve, and various other documents associated with her request. Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 6 Sep 2011, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 15 Jan 2012, the applicant was notified by her commander that he was not recommending her for reenlistment in the Air Force. His reason for this action was the applicant’s conduct did not meet the standards required of an airman in the United States Air Force. On 15 May 2012, the applicant acknowledged receipt of her non- selection for reenlistment and indicated that she did intend to appeal this decision. On 28 Sep 2012, the applicant was honorably discharged with a RE Code of 2X. Her narrative reason for separation was “Completion of Required Active Service.” ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that the applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include her discharge characterization was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant was separated under the Fiscal Year 2012 Enlisted DOS Rollback Program. This program utilized either the separation code JBK (less than six years of active service) or LBK (more than six years of active service) with a corresponding narrative reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service.” The applicant’s discharge was correctly administered on the basis of her RE code of 2X, which denotes “Denied Reenlistment.” The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends. DPSOA states that in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority. The Selective Reenlistment Program considers the member’s Enlisted Performance Report 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. She did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change of her RE code. The complete DPSOA evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 3 May 2013, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ ? 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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their 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 this application in Executive Session on 7 Nov 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, 29 Jan 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Mar 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 23 Apr 2013. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 May 2013. 2 3