RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-02241
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reentry (RE) code of “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an 
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without 
characterization of service) be changed to a code which would 
allow him to reenlist.

His narrative reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry Into 
Military Service) and corresponding separation code (JDA) be 
changed. 

His time in service be adjusted to qualify for the Post-9/11 GI 
Bill benefits.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was honest and upfront regarding the experimental use of 
marijuana.  He would not deliberately misrepresent himself and 
ruin his military career.  Members of his family served and 
retired from the United States Air Force and Navy.  He desires 
to reenlist.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 October 
2013.

The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to 
recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the 
provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Fraudulent Entry Into 
Military Service.  The specific reasons are as follows:






      a.  On the applicant’s SF86 (Questionnaire for National 
Security Positions), dated 21 November 2013, he disclosed that 
he used marijuana twice in April 2009 and April 2010.  On 6 
January 2014 in his pre-screening interview for your security 
clearance, he admitted to using marijuana twice in 2011, prior 
to his enlistment.  In his sworn statement, dated 10 March 2014, 
he stated that he used marijuana twice, once on 20 April 2010 
and once on 20 April 2011, prior to his enlistment.

      b.  In the undated Statement of Reasons for his security 
clearance, a discrepancy was noted between the applicant’s 
SF86 which listed his last use of marijuana in 2010 and his pre-
screening interview, which listed his last use of marijuana as 
being twice in 2011.

      c.  The applicant deliberately misrepresented and/or 
concealed these facts on his 19 March 2013 DD Form 1966 (Record 
of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States), 
which he certified as true and correct on 15 October 2013; and 
his 8 March 2013 AFI IMT 2030 (USAF Drug and Alcohol Abuse 
Certificate), which he certified as true and correct on 
15 October 2013.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and elected to 
submit a statement on his own behalf.  In a legal review of the 
case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally 
sufficient and recommended discharge.  

The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and 
directed an entry level separation.  The applicant was 
discharged on 7 April 2014.  He served 5 months and 23 days on 
active duty.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial to change the applicant’s narrative 
reason for separation and corresponding SPD code.  However, they 
recommend correcting the character of service to reflect 
uncharacterized in accordance with DoD and Air Force 
instructions.  

Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service 
characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 
days continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) 
determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous 
active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service 
to characterize their limited service.  In this case, the 
commander initiated discharge action on 20 March 2014.  At the 
time the discharge action was initiated, the applicant had 157 
days of continuous active service.


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 was 
within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, 
the SPD code and narrative reason for separation are correct as 
indicated on the applicant's DD Form 214.  The applicant did not 
submit any evidence or identify any injustice in the processing 
of his discharge.

The DPSOR complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  DPSIT states the applicant’s 
application is not supported with evidence that he was a victim 
of an error or injustice.  The applicant’s time in service does 
not warrant the time of aggregated service for Post-9/11 GI Bill 
qualification; therefore, the applicant does not qualify for the 
Post-9/11 GI Bill.  There is no injustice to the extent that the 
service member did not receive adequate counseling as required 
by law and DoD regulation.

The DPSIT complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  DPSOA states the RE code 2C is 
required based on the entry level separation with 
uncharacterized character of service.  The applicant does not 
provide any evidence of an error or injustice that warrants a 
reenlistment eligible RE code - but wants to reenter the 
military.  

Although AFPC/DPSOR is recommending correcting the applicant’s 
erroneous “honorable” character of service to “uncharacterized”, 
this correction will not affect the applicants RE code 2C.

The DPSOA complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 10 November 2014, a copy of the evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit 
F).  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 is timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record and given the 
circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the 
separation code and narrative reason for separation assigned 
were proper and in compliance with the appropriate instructions.  
In addition, the applicant has not provided any evidence which 
would lead us to believe that a change to his RE code to allow 
him to reenlist is warranted.  We took note of AFPC/DPSOR 
recommendation to change his characterization of service from 
honorable to uncharacterized.  However, the recommended change 
is not within the purview of the Board since the change can be 
construed as a detrimental action.  With regard to the 
applicant’s request for Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits, we agree 
that the applicant’s time in service does not qualify him for 
Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.  Therefore, we agree with the Air 
Force offices 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.  In the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought in this application.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-02241 in Executive Session on 5 February 2015, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:











The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02241 was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 May 2014, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Record.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 20 June 2014.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 4 August 2014.
  Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 17 October 2014.
  Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 November 2014.







4