RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-02038 INDEX CODE:	112.10
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reason for discharge be changed from “Fraudulent Entry” to “Erroneous Enlistment.”

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He told his recruiter of his childhood condition of asthma; however, the recruiter told him not to write it down if his medical records didn’t reflect his condition. He just wanted to be part of the Air Force. Had he known his condition would prevent him being in the military and result in a fraudulent entry reason for discharge, then he wouldn’t have tried to join the service. He would like future employment in State and/or Federal service and not be limited by a misguided mistake.

The applicant provides no evidence in support of his appeal. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 8 April 2008, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 25 in the grade of airman basic (E-1). On 18 April 2008, after completing six days of basic training, the applicant was diagnosed with a pre-existing condition of asthma.   On
22 April 2008, the applicant composed and signed a statement indicating he didn’t disclose his condition of asthma to his recruiter because he had not used his inhaler for 11-12 years and felt it was just a childhood affliction.

On 28 April 2008, his commander notified the applicant that he was recommending the applicant for an entry-level separation for fraudulent entry. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and indicated he waived his rights to consult counsel and to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 29 April 2008, the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be separated with an entry-level separation. The discharge authority approved the  recommendation for the applicant’s discharge under the

authority of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, Paragraph 5.15.

On 2 May 2008, the applicant was separated with an entry-level, uncharacterized discharge with a narrative reason for separation of “fraudulent entry into the military service.”   He served
5 months and 21 days on active duty.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his reason for discharge. DPSOS states that while the applicant indicates he told his recruiter of his pre-existing asthma condition and was advised not to write it down if it wasn’t in his medical records, his assertion is inconsistent with the statement he made on 22 April 2008, indicating he did not inform his recruiter he was treated for asthma as a child. Based on the documentation on file in his 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. In addition,  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 warranting a change to his narrative reason for separation. Therefore, it is DPSOS’ opinion that his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force instructions.

The complete DPSOS 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 7 November 2008 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough review of the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record we are persuaded that relief is warranted. We note the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance
1.	
with the applicable instruction. However, we find the narrative reason for his entry-level separation; i.e., fraudulent entry, to be overly negative. In our deliberations of this case, it appeared to us that the word “fraudulent” could be misconstrued as misconduct. While the applicant may have had problems progressing in basic training due to a reoccurrence of a childhood asthma condition that he failed to mention upon entry, we do not believe his failure to disclose his injury was intentionally deceptive. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable doubt  as to whether the applicant was properly counseled by his recruiter in regard to completing his enlistment medical history. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we recommend his narrative reason for separation be corrected as indicated below.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that his narrative reason for separation issued in conjunction with his entry level separation on 2 May 2008, was “Erroneous Enlistment.”

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 14 January 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-02038:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 20 May 08.
Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 29 Sep 08. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 08.