RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00530
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation (fraudulent entry into military service) be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His recruiter told him to say no to the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) when questioned about headaches; however, his recruiter denies telling him to do so.  He doesn’t think it’s fair to be punished for something his recruiter told him to do.  He further indicates he thought what the recruiter told him to do was in his best interest; however, it was in the recruiter’s best interest.  His recruiter was a person who he trusted.  He states is sorry for any problems he caused the Air Force.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 January 2004 in the grade of airman basic for a period of six years.

On 2 October 2003, a Report of Medical History, DD Form 2807-1, indicates the applicant checked no in item 15b, “Have you ever had or do you now have frequent or severe headache.”

A Basic Training Record, Lackland Air Force Base, Form 105A, indicates on 12 January 2004, the applicant returned from an appointment with a Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) Form 3530 placing him in an administrative hold status and was referred to the operations officer.  On 13 January 2004, the commander reviewed the WHMC Form 3530 and concurred with the recommendation to place the applicant in an administrative hold status due to frequent headaches.  The applicant was transferred to await further medical evaluation.  On 15 January 2004, the applicant received a waiver stating entry-level separation.  He was restricted from physical conditioning (PC), lifting over 20 pounds and sitting details only.

On 16 January 2004, the applicant indicated in a trainee statement “I have migraines, but I haven’t had one in a couple of months.”  He stated the recruiter indicated, “Well, if you haven’t had them in a while I wouldn’t put it down.  Just tell MEPs no.”

On 22 January 2004, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for Fraudulent Entry.  Specifically, the commander indicated his reason for this action was he received a medical narrative summary dated 15 January 2004, which found the applicant, did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist.  The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force due to existing prior to entry migraines.  The applicant did not ask the Air Force to give him a disability separation because the medical staff found him unqualified.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

Military legal counsel was made available to the applicant; however, he waived his right to consult counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf.

The discharge authority approved the applicant’s entry-level separation.

On 26 January 2004, the applicant was separated with an entry-level separation in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service).  He served three months and four days of total prior inactive service.  He served no time on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated 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.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  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 (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.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to the character of service or a change to his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 April 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  While the evidence of record does not reveal the applicant was miscounseled by his recruiter, we believe under the circumstances of this case, the reason for his separation appears harsh.  In addition, the reason for his separation, fraudulent entry into military service, could hinder the applicant from obtaining employment which based on the evidence of record, we believe should be prevented.  Therefore, we believe any doubt should be resolved in the applicant’s favor and his records should be corrected as 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 at the time of his entry level separation on 26 January 2004, the narrative reason for his separation was Secretarial Authority and Separation Program Designator was “KFF.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00530 in Executive Session on 12 March 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 February 2004, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Military Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 March 2004.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 April 2004.

				

AFBCMR BC-2004-00530

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   , be corrected to show that at the time of his entry level separation on 26 January 2004, the narrative reason for his separation was Secretarial Authority and Separation Program Designator was “KFF.”