RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02716
								INDEX CODE:  110.02

								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  4 MARCH 2006

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be changed. 

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was advised that his medical condition was not of a serious nature.  He came forward with his medical history even though his recruiter advised him not to reveal any previous medical problems. 

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25 May 04, for a period of four years, in the grade of airman first class.

On 17 Jun 04, the squadron commander notified the applicant that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for fraudulent entry into the military.  If approved, his discharge would be described as an entry level separation.  His reason for the proposed action was that the applicant intentionally concealed a prior service medical condition, which if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of his enlistment.  The Air Force discovered that he suffered from migraines.  This medical condition could have rendered him ineligible to enlist in the Air Force.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification on 17 Jun 04, and waived his option to consult legal counsel and submit statements on his own behalf.  

On 18 Jun 04, the Air Education and Training Command attorney advisor found the case file legally sufficient to support separation.  On 18 Jun 04, the discharge authority approved the discharge and directed that applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized entry-level separation.  

Applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on 23 Jun 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of fraudulent entry into military service, and was issued an RE Code of 2C [involuntarily separated with an entry-level separation].  Since his enlistment was considered fraudulent, his total active service was non-creditable.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The applicant was administratively discharged with an entry-level separation for fraudulent entry into military service for concealing a significant history of migraine headaches after his headaches interfered with military training.  The applicant states his recruiter told him not to reveal his medical history; however, he twice signed forms making an official statement in which he attested that no one had advised him to conceal or falsify any information about his medical history.

On 11 Jun 04, the applicant was removed from training due to headaches interfering with training and reported a pre-service history of migraine headaches.  Civilian medical records were obtained showing a significant history of frequent (2-3 times per week) and severe headaches (occasionally having to go lie in a dark quite room) and treatment with Imitrex and Inderal.  Civilian records also showed treatment for sinusitis and allergic rhinitis including anti-histamines, and steroid nasal spray as well as an evaluation by an allergist.  The applicant did not reveal his medical history at the time of enlistment and told Air Force physicians that his recruiter told him not to tell.

At the time of enlistment, the applicant twice completed and signed medical history screening forms (DD 2807), both of which contained a warning that the information given constituted an official statement.  On both forms the applicant checked the “no” box in response to questions asking, “Have you ever had or do you have now:”, “10.j. Sinusitis,” “10.k. Hayfever,” “15.b. Frequent or severe headaches.”

Fraudulent entry is one involving deliberate deception on the part of the member.  An airman may be discharged for fraudulent entry based on the procurement of a fraudulent enlistment or period of military service through any deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment that if known at the time of enlistment or entry into a period of military service, might have resulted in rejection.  The fraud may occur at any time in the enlistment process.  Erroneous enlistment is one that would not have occurred had the relevant facts been known by the Air Force and it was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the member.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 29 Jul 05, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a reply has not been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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 BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his 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.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________

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‑2004-02716 in Executive Session on 13 September 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Aug 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 20 Jul 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Jul 05.