RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02015
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 10 JANUARY 2008
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His narrative reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry into Military
Service/Drug Abuse) be removed from his separation document.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The false-positive result for THC was not valid.
In support of his application, the applicant submits copies of
correspondence to his congressman, a copy of his separation document, and
copies of documentation from his civilian physician.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 5 Apr 2005, prior to his enlistment, the applicant indicated, among
other things, that he had never used or experimented with any illegal drugs
or narcotics. Later, he again indicated that he had not used any illegal
drugs since his original submission.
On 25 July 2005, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves at the
age of 23 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 6 years. He did not
complete basic military training.
On 5 Aug 2005, the applicant indicated on his USAF Drug Certificate he had
used marijuana and cocaine on several occasions between Nov 2000 and April
2005, and Aug 2004 and Jun 2005, respectively.
On 11 Aug 2005, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that he
was recommending he be separated from the Air Force under the provisions of
AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208 for fraudulent entry. The applicant was advised
of his rights, waived his right to consult counsel and declined to submit
statements in his own behalf. The commander thereafter initiated a
recommendation for the applicant’s separation.
A legal review of the discharge case file found the file was legally
sufficient and recommended that the applicant be separated from the service
with an entry-level separation. On 15 Aug 2005, the discharge authority
approved the recommended separation and directed the applicant be
discharged for the reasons recommended by his commander.
On 18 Aug 2005, the applicant was discharged under AFI 36-3208, Fraudulent
Entry into Military Service, Drug Abuse, with an uncharacterized entry-
level separation, and an RE code of 2C.
In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they were unable to
identify an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the basis of
information furnished (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states that based on the
documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation, and the discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. DPPRS notes 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 of
continuous active service it would be unfair to the member and the service
to characterize their limited service. DPPRS states the applicant did not
submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in
the discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a change
to the character of service or his reenlistment eligibility code.
The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 Oct
2006 for review and comment. As of this date, this office has received no
response.
________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopt its 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-
02015 in Executive Session on 21 November 2006, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia R.Collins, Member
Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Sep 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, 23 Aug 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 06.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00416
DPPRS affirms the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a change to his reenlistment eligibility code. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01582
On 22 October 2004, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending the applicant be separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 5.15, for Fraudulent Entry. The application was timely filed. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005- 01582 in Executive Session on 10 January 2006, under...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01130
DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. DPPRS concludes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a change to his reenlistment eligibility code. At...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03426
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03426 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 10 MAY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry-level separation be changed to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02536
He was separated from the Air Force on 4 Oct 05. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02904
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02904 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 MAR 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to a favorable one that would allow her to reenlist into the military. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01998
Since his enlistment was considered fraudulent, his total active service was non-creditable. Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. MICHAEL GALLOGLY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2006-01998 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02405
The applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors or injustices and the narrative reason for separation is correct. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 28 November 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Ms. Cathlynn B. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Aug 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02101
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02101 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be corrected so he can re-enter the Air Force. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02963
He was informed by his commander that there was no guarantee of the job he would receive, but he would most likely be assigned to Security Forces. On 19 Jul 05, he was academically eliminated from the Air Traffic Control course because he failed the Block II, Unit 9 test with a 52% score. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 06.