RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03842

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him 
reentry into the Air National Guard (ANG).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He took an early out because he had back problems that were 
giving him issues in physical fitness.  He took advantage of an 
early out so he would not be kicked out of the military.  His 
back issue is now corrected and he would like to join the ANG.  
He doesn’t know why his RE code is not allowing him to reenter 
the military.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 
28 Aug 07.  

According to the applicant’s AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment 
Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen in the Regular Air 
Force/Air Force Reserve, dated 17 Nov 11, he was non-recommended 
for re-enlistment by his supervisor as a result of a quality 
force review conducted IAW the FY12 Enlisted DOS Rollback PDSM 
11-94.  The commander concurred with this recommendation on 17 
Nov 11.  

The applicant did not appeal the commander’s decision.

On 31 Mar 12, the applicant was discharged honorably, and was 
credited with four years, seven months, and three days of active 
service and was issued an RE code of 2X (1st term, 2nd term or 
career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment).   

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 indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the 
USAF, states commanders have selective reenlistment selection or 
non-selection authority.  The Selective Reenlistment Program 
(SRP) considers the members 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 chose not 
to appeal his non-selection for reenlistment and the RE code 2X 
is correct based his non-selection.  The applicant contends he 
had back problems which caused him issues with passing his 
physical fitness and took an "early out" instead of being 
kicked out.  However, the Rollback is not a voluntary program 
but forces members who are selected based on negative quality 
indicators to separate by a predetermined date.  In the 
applicant's case he had to separate by 31 Mar 12 and could not 
have stayed in the Air Force if he wanted to.  Additionally, 
members that fail physical fitness for a recognized medical 
issue verified by the Medical Group are not kicked out.  
Members on a physical profile are excused from being tested if 
the competent medical authority believes the medical condition 
warrants a profile.

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 23 Feb 15 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-2014-03842 in Executive Session on 14 May 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-03842 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Sep 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Oct 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Feb 15.