RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00157
	 		COUNSEL: NONE
			HEARING DESIRED: NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry (RE) code of 2X, which denotes "First Term, Second 
Term, or Career Airman nonselected for reenlistment” be changed 
to allow him to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He acknowledges that the events that led to his non-selection 
for reenlistment were due his lack of personal responsibility.  
He failed to pass his Fitness Assessment (FA) by one sit-up and 
the second incident was his failure to pay his government credit 
card in a timely manner.  He takes full responsibility for his 
actions and resolved these discrepancies as quickly as possible.  
He passed the next FA with an overall score of 96.4 percent and 
he paid his credit card debt within 48 hours of being notified.  
He was honorably discharged yet he cannot serve in the ANG 
because of the RE code.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration 
for Airmen in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve; Enlisted 
Performance Reports (EPRs), AF Form 1411, Extension or 
Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air 
Force (REGAF)/Air Force Reserve (AF RESERVE)/Air National Guard 
(ANG); Letters of Reprimand (LOR), letters to his senator, 
character statements, and various other documents associated 
with his request.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 February 2007, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force.

On 8 April 2013, via AF Form 1411, the applicant requested a 
12 month extension to qualify for a Permanent Change of Station 
(PCS) assignment.

In a letter dated 8 May 2013, the commander disapproved the 
applicant’s request for an extension due to his inability to 
consistently meet his financial obligations or performance 
expectations.  In addition, the commander noted that extending 
his enlistment would trigger an assignment and he would 
ultimately be separated at his High Year of Tenure (HYT); which 
would require the government to pay travel expenses twice, 
rather than the single expense required at his date of 
separation.

According to AF Form 418, dated 8 May 2013, the applicant was 
notified by his commander that he was not recommending him for 
reenlistment in the Air Force.  His reason for this action was 
the applicant’s inability to maintain standards outlined in AFI 
36-2618, The Enlisted Force Structure.

On 9 May 2013, the applicant acknowledged receipt of his non-
selection for reenlistment and indicated that he would appeal 
this decision.

On 31 May 2013, the commander denied his appeal.

On 6 June 2013, the applicant acknowledged that the commander’s 
decision to deny his appeal continued his ineligibility for 
reenlistment/promotion.

On 5 August 2013, the applicant was honorably discharged from 
the Air Force in the grade of senior airman (E-4) with an RE 
Code of 2X.  His narrative reason for separation is “Non-
Retention on Active Duty.”


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the 
United States Air Force, states that commanders have selective 
reenlistment selection or non-selection authority.  The 
Selective Reenlistment Program considers the member’s EPR 
ratings, unfavorable information from any substantiated source, 
the member's willingness to comply with Air Force standards 
and/or the member’s ability (or lack of) to meet required 
training and duty performance levels.  The applicant's non-
selection for reenlistment was clearly due to his failure to 
comply with standards.

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  The applicant was honorably 
discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-
3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, and Secretary of the 
Air Force (SecAF) Memorandum Fiscal Year 2013 Force Management 
Program dated 31 January 2013, with an honorable discharge.  
Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel 
records, the applicant’s release from active duty was consistent 
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the SecAF 
memorandum and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.  The applicant did not provide any evidence of an 
error or injustice that occurred in the separation processing.

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He reiterates that he corrected the mistakes that led to his 
referral EPRs as quickly as possible and he has had a stellar 
career since these incidents.  His rater’s PCS should have 
generated an EPR.  However, a change of reporting official did 
not occur for six months.  When his EPR was due, his new rater, 
who was deployed, admitted that he was not aware that he was the 
applicant’s rater and had never provided feedback.  Therefore, 
his rating chain decided not to generate a new EPR.  Had he been 
able to extend his enlistment instead of being involuntarily 
separated, an EPR would have been generated in June 2013, 
enabling him to test for the 2014 promotion cycle and he would 
have had the opportunity to become a staff sergeant (SSgt,E-5) 
before reaching his HYT.

In further support of his request the applicant provides copies 
of letters of support from his prospective ANG commander and 
former supervisors.

His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We note the 
applicant provides an email from his former rater who states he 
was unaware he was the applicant’s supervisor.  Consequently, it 
appears an EPR was never generated which more likely than not 
prevented the applicant from testing for promotion to the grade 
of SSgt prior to reaching his HYT.  The applicant also provides 
character reference letters from his previous supervisors and 
prospective ANG commander all in support of his request to 
change his RE code to a waiverable code.  Based on the totality 
of the evidence before us we are persuaded the applicant should 
be given another chance to serve. Whether or not he is 
successful in his attempts to return to the military will depend 
on the needs of the service and our recommendation in no way 
guarantees that he will be allowed to return to any branch of 
service.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, we recommend 
his records be corrected as set forth below.


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 
5 August 2013, he was discharged with a RE code of 3K 
(Secretarial Authority).


The following members of the Board considered this application 
in Executive Session on 12 November 2014 and 23 February 2015, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

All members voted to correct the record as recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR BC-2014-
00157 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 July 2014, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA Advisory, dated 11 February    
            2014.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR Advisory, dated 6 March 2014.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 March 2014.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 April 2014, w/atchs.