RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2020-00403

	COUNSEL:  NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED:  NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

1.  His AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) Consideration for Airmen, be rescinded to allow him to reenter the Air Force Reserve.

2.  In the alternative, his reenlistment code be changed from 5E (Has been denied reenlistment based on unsatisfactory participation/performance, attitude, military bearing, or Behavior) to 5A (Is eligible to reenlist). 

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

The decision to deny his reenlistment appeal was based on a “group decision.”  There were several people within his wing who had similar situations regarding Cannabidiol (CBD) Oil.  Leadership decided to handle everyone involved in the same way, regardless of their own individual circumstances.  His case was not handled on an individual basis.  Specifically, all the factual evidence he submitted in support of his case was overlooked.  He never received an official response from the wing regarding his supporting documentation and was not afforded the opportunity to explain himself to the squadron, group, or wing leadership.  He was denied reenlistment and pushed out of the Air Force Reserve.  He provides a legal opinion which states “In determining whether to pursue punitive or adverse action for an offense involving CBD, commander should focus on the source of the CBD and the member’s intent.”  It was never his intent to consume THC but to manage his anxiety.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a timeline of events, character statements, a memo from a doctor who states the applicant purchased two bottles of “Enhanced clinical Nutrition CBD oil” from his office, a legal opinion on the use of  CBD oil, letter of reprimand, denial of reenlistment package, and other documents related to his appeal.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve master sergeant (E-7).

According to the documentation provided by the applicant and analysis of the facts, the following information is provided:

On 3 Jun 19, according to AF Form 418, the applicant was not selected for reenlistment due to his failure to comply with Air Force standards, in accordance with AFI 90-507, Military Drug Demand Reduction Program; failure to fulfill his senior noncommissioned officer responsibilities in accordance with AFI 36-2618, The Enlisted Force Structure; and testing positive for the wrongful use of marijuana in violation of Article 112, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The applicant acknowledged receipt and elected to appeal the non-selection.  

On 7 Sep 19, according to a memorandum by the squadron commander, dated 23 Sep 19, a reenlistment appeal board convened to review AF Form 418, the applicant’s written appeal,  and supporting documentation to recommend to the Senior Reserve Commander to either uphold the unit commander’s non-selection for reenlistment or approve the applicant’s appeal.  

On 24 Sep 19, after reviewing the board’s recommendation and discussing the circumstances with wing medical, legal and personnel experts, the commander non-concurred with the appeal board’s recommendation.  

On 5 Oct 19, the appeal authority denied the applicants appeal and on the same date, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s decision.  

On 15 Oct 19, according to a memorandum to the applicant, the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) Office of the Inspector General notified the applicant that per their phone conversation, his complaint concerning the reenlistment code was not a matter for the IG Complaints Resolution Process and was closing his case.   

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFRC/A1K recommends denying the application.  Based on the documentation provided by the applicant and analysis of the facts, there is no evidence of an error.  AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment and Extension of Enlistment in the United States Air Force, states in selecting Air Force enlisted members for reenlistment, commanders give primary consideration to initial eligibility and performance.  If the member has been denied reenlistment based on unsatisfactory participation/performance, attitude, military bearing, or behavior then reenlistment code 5E is appropriate. The commander listed the reasons why the applicant does not meet eligibility requirements to be selected for reenlistment; and as a result of being denied reenlistment, RE code 5E is appropriate and must remain in place.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 9 Apr 20 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board is not persuaded by the applicant’s contention that the commander’s denial of his reenlistment was improper or unjust.  While the applicant states the appeal authority overlooked factual evidence used by the appeal board that recommend he be allowed to reenlist, the Board disagrees.  In this respect, the Board notes the evidence provided by the applicant shows that the appeal authority considered the applicant’s written appeal, other supporting documents, and the appeal board’s recommendation.  The commander also consulted with wing medical, legal and personnel experts before he made his decision to uphold the commander’s decision to deny the applicant reenlistment.  In cases of this nature, the Board is not inclined to usurp the judgments of commanding officers absent clear evidence of an error or abuse of discretional authority.  The Board has no such showing here.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2020-00403 in Executive Session on 1 Jul 20:

, Chair, AFBCMR 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 15 Oct 19.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFRC/A1K, w/atchs, dated 26 Mar 20.
Exhibit D:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 9 Apr 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.