RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01994
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to her discharge and upon being informed of her options for  discharge
it was never disclosed to her that an RE  code  of  “2C”  would  render  her
ineligible to enlist in another branch of service.  Had she known  this  she
may have made another decision.  The letter of notification  indicates  that
she would be ineligible to reenlist in the Air Force.   It  does  not  state
that the discharge would render her ineligible to enlist in  another  branch
of service.  She feels that it is an injustice that  she  was  given  an  RE
code of “2C” and would like it  changed  to  a  code  that  would  make  her
eligible to enlist in the United States Navy.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provided  a  personal  statement,  3
character reference letters, and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 August 1987  in  the  grade
of airman basic for a period of 4 years.

On 21 January 1988, the applicant was notified of her commander's intent  to
initiate discharge action against her for  the  following  reasons:   letter
from supervisor, dated 4  January  1988,  letter  from  applicant,  dated  7
January 1988, and a letter from the Branch Chief,  dated  15  January  1988,
essentially indicating the applicant’s disillusionment with  the  Air  Force
and her desire to go home (Exhibit B).

The commander advised applicant of her right to consult  legal  counsel  and
submit statements in her  own  behalf;  or  waive  the  above  rights  after
consulting with counsel.

The commander indicated in her  recommendation  for  discharge  action  that
before recommending this discharge action, she had taken the  rehabilitative
actions in the  form  of:  verbally  counseling  the  member;  however,  she
submitted a letter requesting separation.  The commander believed  it  would
be in the best interest of the Air Force to honor  the  request  before  the
applicant became more of an administrative burden.

On 22 January 1988, applicant waived her right to consult with  counsel  and
to submit statements in her own behalf.

A legal review was conducted on 22  January  1988  in  which  the  assistant
staff judge advocate recommended that the applicant  be  separated  with  an
entry level separation without probation and rehabilitation.

Applicant was discharged on 26 January 1988, in the grade  of  airman  basic
with an uncharacterized discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Entry-
Level Performance and Conduct).  She served a total of 5 months and 22  days
of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Separation Procedures Section, Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed
this application and states that the member was notified on 21 January  1988
that she was  being  discharged  for  eligibility  and  criteria  and  would
receive an entry-level separation.  Her supervisor’s letter stated that  she
was  disillusioned  with  the  Air  Force  and  its  mission.   She  had   a
misconception about her  supply  job.   After  seven  weeks  as  a  Security
Specialist, she was changed to Supply.  She was not happy  with  Supply  and
showed a lack of initiative to learn her job and  adapt  to  military  life.
She  showed  an  amount  of  insecurity  that  hindered  her  from  being  a
productive team player.  Her supervisors felt it was in  the  best  interest
of the Air Force to release her with an entry-level discharge.   Based  upon
the documentation in the file, they believe  the  discharge  was  consistent
with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  and
regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion  of
the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing.  However, the member’s DD Form 214, Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty, was incorrectly issued.  They  have  reissued  a
new DD Form 214 to correct the form to  the  terms  that  should  have  been
annotated in the following  areas:  type  of  separation  to  “entry-level,”
character  of  service  to  “uncharacterized,”  and  narrative  reason   for
separation to “entry-level performance and conduct.”

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Assistant Chief, Skills  Management  Branch,  Directorate  of  Personnel
Programs Management, AFPC/DPPAE, also reviewed this application  and  states
that  they  conducted  a  review  of  the  applicant’s   case   file.    The
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated  with  an
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without  characterization  of
service” is correct.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 31 August 2001, copies of the Air Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within thirty (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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of  probable  error  or  injustice  warranting  a  change  in  the
applicant’s RE code.  The RE code issued at the time of  separation  was  in
accordance with the applicable regulations.  However, the Board  finds  that
based on the applicant’s post-service  accomplishments  and  her  desire  to
join the Navy, her RE code should be changed to “3A.”   The  Board  believes
she should be afforded the opportunity to apply for a waiver  to  enlist  in
the armed services.  Whether or not she is successful  will  depend  on  the
needs of the service and our recommendation in no way  guarantees  that  she
will be allowed to return to the Air Force or any  branch  of  the  service.
Therefore, we recommend her RE code be changed to “3A”  (First-term  airman,
who separates before completing 36 months on  current  enlistment,  and  who
has no known disqualifying factors or ineligibility conditions except  grade
and skill level and insufficient).

_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that her  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)
code issued in conjunction with her entry level  separation  on  26  January
1988 was “3A.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 11 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
            Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
            Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 July 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 August 2001.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 August 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 August 2001.




                 TERRY A. YONKERS
                 Panel Chair


AFBCMR 01-01994





MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to, be corrected to show that  her  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)
code issued in conjunction with her entry level  separation  on  26  January
1988 was “3A.”





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency