RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03801
            INDEX CODE:  110.02, 100.03
            COUNSEL:

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation, the separation program designator
(SPD) code and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The characterization of his  discharge  has  negatively  affected  his
ability to gain employment.  He was emotionally immature and unable to
adapt to military  life  when  he  enlisted.   He  admits  to  smoking
marijuana days prior to reporting for active duty, but states that the
emotional strain of being the focus of a pedophile for  several  years
added to his emotional instability. He states  that  he  is  gainfully
employed, attending college and is now a mature individual.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement,
a letter from his mother, and a letter from his attorney.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
1 December 1999 for a term of 4  years.   On  20  December  1999,  the
applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be
discharged for fraudulent entry into the Air Force.  The basis for the
action was on 13 September 1999, he indicated on  his  AF  Form  2030,
USAF Drug Certificate, that he had used or experimented with marijuana
but never used or possessed any illegal drug or narcotic.  Then  on  1
December 1999, he certified that he had not used any  drug,  including
marijuana, since originally signing the form.

On 2 December 1999, he submitted a urine sample that  tested  positive
for marijuana.  He was advised of  his  rights  in  this  matter.   He
acknowledged receipt of the notification on the same day,  waived  his
right to consult counsel, and elected not to submit statements on  his
own  behalf.   The  discharge  authority  approved  the  discharge  of
fraudulent entry and ordered an entry-level separation. On 23 December
1999, he was administratively discharged with an uncharacterized entry-
level separation, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208,  Administrative
Separation of Airman, (Fraudulent Entry into Military Service).  Since
his enlistment was considered fraudulent, his total active service was
non-creditable.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  The discharge was consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of the  discharge  regulation.
The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors
of injustices that occurred in the discharge  process.   Additionally,
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant’s attorney submitted a letter and states that  the  crux
of the applicant’s contentions is based upon the traumatic  events  in
his young life; he was emotionally ill equipped to enter the  service.
He explained that this vital point was not addressed in  the  advisory
opinion.  He states that the applicant suffered from  acute  emotional
distress caused by the discovery that his surrogate father was in fact
a pedophile, who wormed his way into the life of the applicant to seek
physical gratification.

He states that the  applicant  is  not  arguing  the  results  of  the
urinalysis, rather based on the facts and  circumstances,  whether  he
should be granted clemency.

Applicant’s complete  statement,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  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  an  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  changing  his
narrative reason for separation, SPD code and RE code.  In regards  to
the applicant’s request for clemency, no documentation was provided to
the  Board,  to  show  a   record   of   satisfactory   post   service
accomplishments.  Typically,  clemency  would  be  considered  when  a
person has been separated for a length of time, and provides  evidence
to  substantiate  post   service   accomplishments.    After   careful
consideration of the available evidence, we found no  indication  that
the actions taken to effect his discharge were improper or contrary to
the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time,  or
that the actions taken against the applicant  were  based  on  factors
other than his own misconduct.  In view of the above,  we  agree  with
the opinion and recommendation of the  Air  Force  office  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.  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 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  BC-2002-
03801 in Executive Session on 20 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
                 Mr. Kenneth Dumm, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Dec 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 03.
      Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Attorney, dated 22 Jan 03.




      JOHN L. ROBUCK
      Panel Chair