RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			   DOCKET NUMBER: 04-00870
						   INDEX CODE: 110.02
    						   COUNSEL:  NONE
    						   HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed so he may enlist in the Army.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time he enlisted in the Air Force, he was young and immature and had not put much thought into his enlistment.  When he arrived at basic training, he had second thoughts.  He began to miss his family and friends and could only think about going home.  He was ready to do anything to get home.  So he told Air Force officials that he had lied about using drugs.  He made it sound really bad so he would be sure he would be sent home.  This was a big mistake.  He is asking for a second chance.  He now knows what he would like to do with his future.  He is ready to commit, serve and dedicate himself to the military.   

In support of his request, he submits a personal statement.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 September 2001, and was enrolled in Basic Military Training (BMT).  

On 26 June 2001, prior to his enlistment in the Regular Air Force, applicant indicated on an AF Form 2030, USAF Drug and Alcohol Abuse Certificate, that he had never used or experimented with marijuana, and that he never experimented with, used, or possessed any illegal drugs or narcotics.  On 18 September 2001, while at BMT, applicant indicated on Lackland AFB Form 174, Advice For and Statement of Preservice Drug Abuser, that he had used marijuana, stimulants, hallucinogens and narcotics.

On 24 September 2001, in accordance with AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.15, Fraudulent Enlistment, the commander initiated discharge proceedings against the applicant.  The commander indicated that the applicant intentionally concealed prior service drug usage, which, if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of his enlistment.  The applicant was advised of his rights in this matter.  Applicant waived his entitlement to counsel and his right to submit statements in his behalf.  In a legal review of the discharge case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.  On 26 September 2001, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.  Accordingly, applicant was discharged on 28 September 2001 by reason of “Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service/Drug Abuse” with a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C.”  He had served 2 months and 8 days on active duty. 

Examiner’s Note:  RE Code 2C denotes “Involuntary separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.”

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS indicates that the applicant’s uncharacterized service is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force Instructions.  Based on the documentation on file the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 April 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant for review and comment.  As of this date, this office has not received a response.  

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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 error or injustice that would warrant a change to his RE code.  Evidence has not been provided that would lead us to believe that the applicant’s discharge in 2001 was erroneous or unjust.  Therefore, we have no basis to conclude that the corresponding RE code that was assigned at the time of his separation does not accurately reflect the circumstances of his separation.  In the absence of evidence to indicate that the information contained in his records is erroneous or that his commander abused his discretionary authority, 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 this application in Executive Session on 11 May 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Feb 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Mar 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Apr 04.