RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04792

			COUNSEL:  NONE

   			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reentry (RE) code “2X” which denotes, “1st term, 2nd term or 
career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment” be 
changed so she can reenlist.    

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her behavior was not deserving of a “2X” RE code.  

She learned while attempting to reenlist in the Air Force 
Reserve that her RE code disqualified her from reenlistment.  
While researching her options, she was directed to apply to the 
Board.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.  

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 Jul 01, the applicant entered active duty.

According to AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program 
Consideration, dated 16 May 06, her supervisor recommended she 
be denied reenlistment and the recommendation was approved by 
her commander.  The specific reasons were her poor 
organizational skills and lack of initiative.  She was 
decertified and reissued her 5-level Career Development Course 
(CDC) which she failed to complete in a timely manner.  She had 
an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), a referral Enlisted 
Performance Report (EPR), a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for 
failure to follow a direct order and several Letters of 
Counseling (LOC) for her work performance.  She was given 
numerous chances to improve her work performance and proficiency 
but failed to comply with Air Force standards and core values.

On 17 May 06, the applicant acknowledged her non-selection for 
reenlistment and indicated her intent to appeal the decision.   
However; there is no documentation to show she submitted her 
appeal within the required 10 calendar days.  

According to her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, on 15 Mar 07, she was honorably 
discharged with an RE code of “2X” and narrative reason for 
separation of “Discharge.” 

She served 5 years, 7 months and 21 days on active duty.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  The applicant does not provide 
any proof of an error or injustice in reference to her RE code.  
AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, states 
commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-
selection authority.  The Selective Reenlistment Program (SRB) 
considers the member’s EPR ratings, UIF, airman’s willingness to 
comply with standards and the ability to meet required training 
and duty performance levels.  The applicant was non-selected for 
reenlistment based on her own actions.  Her supervisor states 
she had poor organizational skills, lacked initiative and needed 
constant supervision to complete minor tasks.  Additionally, her 
job knowledge was so deficient she had to be decertified 
(downgraded from a 5-skill to a 3-skill level) and reissued her 
5-level CDC.  She also had a UIF with a LOR and several LOCs for 
work performance.   

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 10 Jan 14, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit 
D).  As of this date, this office has not received a response. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file.   

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, 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-2013-04792 in Executive Session on 29 Jul 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

 , Panel Chair
 , Member
 , Member
      
The following pertinent documentary was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Sep 13.  
Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Military Personnel Records
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 10 Dec 13.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14. 
	

	Panel Chair