RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02841
            INDEX CODE:  112.10

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment (RE) code be changed from “ineligible” to “eligible.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He made a costly and grave mistake before leaving for  Basic  Military
Training (BMT) by smoking a small amount (experimental) of  marijuana.
He  takes  full  responsibility  for  his  actions  and   takes   this
opportunity to say that he loves his country, has wanted to  serve  in
the military since he was a young child, is extremely passionate about
his country, is patriotic and still dreams  today  of  being  able  to
serve in it’s military.  He states that the two months  prior  to  his
reporting to BMTS he found out about  the  impending  divorce  of  his
parents after 24 years of marriage.  His attempt  to  deal  with  this
situation and be a mentor to his younger brothers placed a heavy  load
on him.  Soon after, a few weeks before he was to leave for BMTS,  his
grandmother died.  It was then that he made the mistake  of  partaking
in a small amount of marijuana.

He wants more than anything to be able to take that moment in his life
back but realizes he cannot.  He states that that  one  incident  does
not reflect who he  really  is  nor  does  it  demonstrate  the  moral
character he was raised with.  He is not looking for pity  nor  making
excuses.  This incident has brought shame on himself and his family as
well as jeopardized his chances at fulfilling his dream to  serve  his
country.  He hopes the mistake he made in a young and  difficult  part
of his life does not take away his chance to serve.

He states he was separated from the West Virginia Air  National  Guard
(WV ANG) during the tenure of a previous state Adjutant  General  (AG)
whose policy was to  punish  substance  abuse  with  the  most  severe
punishment available: prohibiting future reenlistment.  The new AG has
contemplated  rescinding  this  policy  by   considering   each   case
individually.  He states the WV AG supports his appeal.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement, a statement from his father, his grandfather, and a copy of
his NGB Form 22, National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record
of Service.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the West Virginia Air National Guard (WV ANG) on
4 May 2001 and entered Basic Military Training (BMT)  on  19  February
2002.  Shortly after arrival at BMT, he was administered a  urinalysis
drug test the results of which were positive for  marijuana  use.   He
was discharged from the WV ANG on 31 May 2002 for  Misconduct  –  Drug
Abuse through Urinalysis.  He has served for one year and twenty-eight
days and was discharged as an Airman First Class (A1C/E-3).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPPI  recommends  denial.   DPPI   notes   the   applicant   takes
responsibility for his actions but takes exception to his request  for
consideration based on an “experimental smoking of a small  amount  of
marijuana.”  DPPI states during the time between  his  enlistment  and
his departure for BMT, he received repeated counseling  regarding  the
Air Force’s policy against drug abuse.  Additionally, he  was  briefed
that he would be subjected to a urinalysis test  on  arrival  at  BMT.
Finally, DPPI notes that the level of marijuana  measured  during  the
urinalysis was a concentration of 21 ng/ml; an amount well  above  the
cut-off level of 15 ng/ml established by the Air Force.

Citing AFI 36-3209, DPPI states that drug abuse is not compatible with
military service and though a members’ service may  have  been  honest
and  faithful,  if  significant  negative  aspects   of   conduct   or
performance exists then the reenlistment eligibility  of  “ineligible”
is appropriate.

DPPI’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air National  Guard  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 19 December 2003 for review and comment within  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 timely filed.

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of an  error  or  injustice  in  regard  to  applicant’s
request  that  his  reenlistment  eligibility  be  changed.   After  a
thorough review of the documentation provided in support of his appeal
and the  evidence  of  record,  it  is  our  opinion  that  given  the
circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air National  Guard,
the reenlistment eligibility assigned to the applicant was proper  and
in compliance with the appropriate directives.

4.   Notwithstanding  the  aforementioned,  we  note  the  applicant’s
sincere remorse for his action, the experimental nature of the  event,
and his standing in a  long  and  distinguished  lineage  of  military
members and feel he should  have  the  chance  to  be  considered  for
reenlistment.  Additionally, the 167th Airlift Wing from  the  WV  ANG
has indicated their willingness to reconsider  his  case  for  reentry
into their unit.  Whether or not he is successful will depend  on  the
needs of the ANG and our recommendation in no way guarantees  that  he
will be allowed to return to any branch of the service.   Accordingly,
we recommend that his records be corrected  to  the  extent  indicated
below.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 31 May 2002, he was
discharged with a reenlistment eligibility of “Eligible.”
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 2 March 2004, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr, Panel Chair
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
      Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member


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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 4 Dec 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.



                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair





BC-2003-02841




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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 31 May 2002,
he was discharged with a reenlistment eligibility of “Eligible.”





     JOE G. LINEBERGER

     Director

     Air Force Review Boards Agency