RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-05133

  			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reentry (RE) code 2X (first-term or second-term or career airman not selected for reenlistment) be changed.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was active duty for five and a half years.  He performed his 
duties to the highest of his abilities and with pride, honor and a 
sense of service.  He would like to serve his country again.

The applicant provides no supporting documentation. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Air Force on 24 October 2006.  On 
23 November 2011, his commander non-selected him for reenlistment 
under the FY12 Enlisted Rollback Program.  He was honorably 
discharged on 31 March 2012 after serving 5 years, 5 months and 
7 days.  His RE code was listed as 2X.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  The applicant was discharged on 
31 March 2012, FY12 AF Force Shaping Rollback Program after his 
commander non-selected him for reenlistment on AF IMT 418, 
Selective Reenlistment Program consideration. 

AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, states commanders have 
selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority.  The 
Selective Reenlistment Program considers the members 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 thereof, to 
meet required training and duty performance levels.  

The applicant does not provide evidence of an error or an 
injustice.  

The complete 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 3 July 2014 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.


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.  
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-2013-05133 in Executive Session on 14 August 2014, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-05133 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Oct 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 25 Nov 13.
        Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 14.
1 2