RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01768

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to 1J so that she may reenlist in the military.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was unjustly released from active duty.  At the time she was released, she took her end of course exams twice and failed both times due to working 12 hour days and suffering a miscarriage.  She improved on the 2nd exam but her acting chief had something personal against her and wanted her out of the Air Force.  She knew her job, paperwork and text but she had a hard time taking written tests.  If she could have taken the test verbally, she would have passed.  

In support of the applicant’s appeal, she submits a copy of DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty.

Applicant’s complete submission, with an attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 7 July 1987 for a term of 4 years.  The applicant was discharged for unsatisfactory performance with service characterized as honorable on 11 January 1989 in the grade of airman first class.  She served 1 year, 6 months and 5 days of active service.

On 3 August 1988 and 12 October 1988, the applicant failed her End of Course Examinations.  The squadron section commander had taken steps to assist the member in order to pass her CDC's.  She was provided a trainer, was given a closed book VRE test prior to course exam retake, and had passed it.  On 10 November 1988, the member was removed from formal upgrade training due to her second failure of the course exam.  On 5 December 1988, the applicant's commander notified her that she was being discharge for unsatisfactory duty performance with a 2C RE code.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  She provided no other facts warranting a change in her discharge.  She has not filed a timely request.

AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE stated the applicant's Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service" is correct. 

AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 16 Aug 02, for review and comment within 30 days.  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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Other than her own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence to substantiate her contention of being unjustly released from active duty.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number 02-01768 in Executive Session on 6 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 21 May 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Jun 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 Aug 02
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Aug 02.

	
	Panel Chair