RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01626 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) 2X (first-term, second-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP) be changed to allow him to join the Air National. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was denied reenlistment due to an Article 15 for errors on an aircraft form. That was a one-time incident. He is grateful to have served for almost 14 years. He would like to serve his country in the Air National Guard. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides documentation from his master personnel record. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air Force who served from 27 January 1999 through 29 September 2012. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is listed at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant was discharged under the FY12 Force Shaping Rollback Program after serving 13 years, 8 months and 3 days on active duty. His commander non-selected him for reenlistment on 16 May 2012. The applicant acknowledged non-selection and did not appeal. AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, states commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority. The Selective Reenlistment Program considers the members performance reports, unfavorable information from any source, the airman’s willingness to comply with Air Force standards and/or the airman’s ability, or lack thereof, to meet required training and duty performance levels. The applicant provides no proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. Although the applicant cites a one- time incident in which he received an Article 15 punishment, his commander cites a Letter of Reprimand for improper Government credit card use, issues that include failure to communicate, and multiple instances of skill not commensurate with rank which resulted in his 7-level decertification and revoking of his Red X special certification. The complete 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 19 May 2013, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 are not persuaded by the evidence submitted in his appeal that a change in his RE code is warranted. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility, and adopt is rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01626 in Executive Session on 12 December 2013 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 10 May 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 13. 1 2