RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00625 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code “2X” (First Term, Second Term, or Career Airman non-selected for reenlistment) be changed to allow reentry into the National Guard. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received an Honorable discharge and would like to get back into the Guard and continue to serve his country. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 8 Jul 08. On 10 Sep 10, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment, for violating Article 92, consuming alcohol while under the legal age of 21. The applicant was reduced in grade to airman (suspended), forfeited $100 per pay for one month and given 15 days of extra duty. On 24 Feb 11, the applicant’s commander non-selected him for reenlistment based on multiple disciplinary infractions and off duty behavior. On 21 May 11, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 10 months, and 23 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit B. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was discharged under the Fiscal Year 2011 Air Force – Force Shaping Rollback Program. The applicant’s commander non-selected him for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP); which, resulted in the “2X” RE Code. In accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority. They may consider 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. 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 15 Sep 14 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been a 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. 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-2014-00625 in Executive Session on 16 Dec 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 8 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 14.