RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04757 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2X (1st term, 2nd term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) be changed. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214 is inaccurate because there is no reason for him to have a RE code of 2X. Also, there is no AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, on file in his behalf. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 13 January 1999. On 18 September 2001, the applicant received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), in violation of Article 128. Specifically, the reason for the action was for unlawfully striking someone on the head and neck with a metal crutch. His commander imposed punishment consisting of reduced to the grade of Airman (E-2) suspended until 17 March 2002, forfeitures of $150.00 pay per month for 2 months. According to the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), it reflects the applicant was issued an RE code of 2X. In addition, he was ineligible for promotion due to his denial of reenlistment. On 15 September 2004, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, with a narrative reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service,” along with a separation program designator (SPD) code of “JBK” and RE code of “2X.” He was credited with 5 years, 8 months, and 3 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 C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant was discharged under the Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) Air Force’s Force Shaping Date of Separation (DOS) Rollback Program. In accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, commanders have selective reenlistment selection 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. Although there is not an Air Force Form 418 in the applicant’s record denying him reenlistment, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (absent evidence to the contrary) and as such all government officials are presumed to have exercised their duties in accordance with the governing law and established procedures. The applicant’s record shows evidence of disciplinary infractions that support his denial of reenlistment. Also, the applicant had at least one other disciplinary infraction sometime in 2003 or 2004 timeframe to have been eligible for and forced to separate under the DOS Rollback Program in FY04. Since it has been over 10 years, other derogatory information in his records, besides the Article 15 in 2001, cannot be found. In addition, Letters of Counseling (LOCs) and Letters of Reprimand (LORs) are not kept in the personnel record. Although the applicant believes his RE code is incorrect, he provides no proof of an error or injustice. As such, the applicant’s RE code is correct based on being non-selected for reenlistment under the SRP. 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(s) was forwarded to the applicant on DD 20 March 2015for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. Furthermore, the applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing on a matter now dating back over 10 years, which has greatly complicated our ability to determine the merits of the application. Therefore, we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04757 in Executive Session on 24 June 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 November 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 January 2015. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 March 2015. 1 2