RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03339
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his RE code changed to reenlist in the service.  He indicates that he never abused or used any drugs during his delayed enlistment period.  He was looking for a way out of the service.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, Corning Performance Summary, dated 12 April 2002, Character Reference Letter, dated 26 April 2001, and other documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25 September 1996 in the grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years.

On 10 October 1996 the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for fraudulent entry.  The applicant intentionally concealed prior service drug usage, which if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of his enlistment.  Specific reasons are as follows:  

	  On 3 July 1996 he executed an AF Form 2030 (USAF Drug Certificate) and indicated that:  He had never used or experimented with marijuana or any dangerous drug or narcotic.  On 25 September 1996 he certified that he had not used any drug, including marijuana since he originally completed the form.  Had the Air Force known of his pre-service drug involvement, it would have rendered him ineligible to enlist.

	  On 7 October 1996 he executed an LTC Form 174 and indicated the following illegal involvement with control substances:  Marijuana: June 1991 through September 1996 (3-5 times a week), Stimulants, Depressants, Hallucinogens: July 1995 through August 1995 (2 times total), and Narcotics: May 1994 through October 1995 (3 times total).

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

The applicant waived his right to consult with counsel, and waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.

The Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.
 
On 15 October 1996, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge.

Applicant was separated on 17 October 1996, in the grade of airman with an uncharacterized discharge, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service/Drug Abuse).  Applicant received an RE code of 2C, Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated that based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force instructions.  An entry -level/uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and should not be confused with other types of separation.

The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.  Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge.  He has not filed a timely request.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE indicated that the RE code of 2C “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 14 February 2003, 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice that would warrant a change to his RE code.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the RE code assigned was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.  Applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise.  Therefore, we agree with the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rational as the basis for our conclusion that he has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive 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 an error or an 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03339 in Executive Session on 3 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 November 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 November 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 February 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 February 2003.