RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03668

			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 Re-enlistment Program (SRP)) be changed to allow him 
to enlist in the Air National Guard.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was the result of his supervisor not training him.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 16 Aug 11.

On 28 Mar 13, the applicant’s supervisor non-recommended him for 
reenlistment and on the same date, the applicant’s commander 
non-selected him for reenlistment.  In doing so, the commander 
indicated the applicant was placed on a control roster for 
failure to adapt to military standards.

On 28 Mar 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt and on 2 Apr 
13, rendered an intent to appeal the commander’s decision.  

On 11 Apr 13, the applicant submitted his appeal of the 
commander’s decision and on 29 Apr 13, the appeal was denied by 
the appeal authority.

On 30 Apr 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the denial 
of his appeal case.

On 31 May 13, the applicant was furnished an honorable 
discharge, with a RE code of 2X, and was credited with 1 year, 
9 months, and 15 days of total active service.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.    

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not 
provided any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his 
RE code and his non-selection for reenlistment was in accordance 
with current guidance.  His non-selection for re-enlistment was 
carried out in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the 
USAF, which indicates that commanders have selective 
reenlistment or non-selection authority.  The SRP considers the 
member’s Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) 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.  The applicant was in his reenlistment 
window but was denied reenlistment, which required him to 
separate under the rollback guidance.

A complete copy of the AFPC/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 31 Oct 13 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an 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 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
While we note the applicant’s contention that he was not 
properly trained by his supervisor, we do not find the evidence 
he has provided sufficient to conclude that the commander’s 
subsequent decision to deny him reenlistment were arbitrary or 
capricious, disproportionate to the circumstances, or 
represented an injustice when compared to those similarly 
situated.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested 
relief.

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-03668 in Executive Session on 6 Mar 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	                        , Panel Chair
	                        , Member
	                        , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Sep 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair