RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03769 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She completed her enlistment and medical forms in the manner she was told to by her recruiter. She was advised by her recruiter not to mention her medical condition. In support of her request, applicant provided a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and two letters of support. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Sep 07, for a period of four years, in the grade of airman first class. On 24 Sep 07, the squadron commander notified the applicant that he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force for fraudulent entry into the military. 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 her enlistment. The Air Force discovered that she has a history of recurrent cystitis. This medical condition could have rendered her ineligible to enlist in the Air Force. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification on 24 Sep 07, and waived her option to consult legal counsel and submit statements on her own behalf. On 25 Sep 07, the case file was found legally sufficient to support separation. On 26 Sep 07, the discharge authority approved the discharge and directed she be discharged with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. On 28 Sep 07, she received an uncharacterized entry-level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of fraudulent entry into military service, and was issued a reenlistment eligibility code of 2C [involuntarily separated with an entry-level separation]. Since her enlistment was considered fraudulent, her total active service was non-creditable. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. She provided no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during her discharge processing and she provided no facts warranting a change to her narrative reason for separation. While the applicant’s 20 Sep 07 statement contradicts the letters she provided with her petition with regard to whether her recruiter knew of the medical condition, all the evidence shows that the applicant deliberately concealed a medical condition that might have resulted in her rejection from the service. A fraudulent enlistment is a defective enlistment. A member may be separated on the basis of procurement of a fraudulent enlistment, induction, 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; for example when airmen are asked to fill out forms. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/RSOPA recommends denial. RSOPA states after reviewing the facts in the application they agree that the fraudulent entry with an uncharacterized entry-level separation should be upheld. During her initial processing, she had several opportunities to disclose the fact that she has recurrent cystitis and had been on medication since the age of 15. On 20 Sep 07, she made an official statement saying that she was aware that she had recurrent cystitis at age 15 in 2005 and was seen by a physician. She was seen on multiple dates and was prescribed various medications to treat her condition. She also stated that she did not inform her recruiter of this fact because she did not want to take a chance on being disqualified from the Air Force. She thought that she could keep her medical condition under control. The complete RSOPA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 16 May 08, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been received. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 opinions and recommendations of 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. 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 Docket Number BC-2007-03769 in Executive Session on 9 Jul 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-03769 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Nov 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 21 Apr 08. Exhibit D. Letter, AFRS/RSOPA, dated 5 May 08 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 May 08.