RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00007 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His narrative reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry into Military Service) and corresponding separation code (JDA), be changed. 2. His Reentry (RE) code of 2C which denotes (Involuntarily separated with an entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a code that will allow him to serve again in the military. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: During his first week of Basic Military Training (BMT), he had his first Physical Training (PT) evaluation and afterwards he noticed soreness in his abdominal muscles. He was asked if he ever had stomach problems in the past. He stated that he had surgery when he was sixteen and was told to watch for issues with scar tissue forming in the abdomen. He has since been advised that he did not disclose this information to the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) and that he committed a fraudulent enlistment. He gave the MEPS all of his medical records and there is no mention of scar tissue in his abdomen. His civilian hospital faxed his records directly to the medical officer. He was advised that even though the MEPS had his records, he still had to apply for a waiver to return to training, which he did, and his waiver was denied. The RE code is preventing him from getting back in the service. He was told he could reenlist if he provided medical paperwork or a doctor’s opinion that he was medically fine. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 13 Jan 12, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of six years. On 13 Apr 12, the applicant was notified by his squadron commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for “Erroneous Enlistment.” The reason for the proposed action was his commander received a medical narrative summary, dated 29 Mar 12, which found the applicant did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist due to chronic abdominal pain that existed prior to entering military service. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge. He waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the separation. On 17 Apr 12, the discharge authority approved the separation, and the applicant was discharged with an entry-level separation by reason of fraudulent entry into military service. He served three months and five days of active duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of a change in the applicant’s narrative reason for separation and separation code. DPSOS states the applicant’s service characterization is correct as reflected on his DD Form 214. DPSOR states that the applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of chronic abdominal pain. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of the applicant’s enlistment, he would not have been allowed entry into the military. 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. Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. DPSOR states that 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. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. DPSOR further states that although the applicant is apparently succeeding and coping well in his civilian capacity, it does not change the basis for which he was discharged from the Air Force. The military environment is unique and stressors encountered in such an environment may not appear or surface when removed from the military environment. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code to one that would allow him to reenlist. DPSOA states the applicant’s RE code (2C) is correct based on his involuntary entry level separation with uncharacterized service. The applicant has not provided any evidence of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 31 Mar 13, 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 (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ 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 concerning the applicant’s RE code. The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction. The RE code which was issued at the time of the applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust. We, therefore, conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request. We note that AFPC/DPSOR initially recommended denial of the applicant’s request to change his narrative reason for separation and separation code. However, upon further review DPSOR has indicated that the applicant’s DD Form 214 is in error and incorrectly reflects the circumstances surrounding his separation. As such, they will administratively correct his DD Form 214 to reflect the appropriate narrative reason for separation of “Erroneous Entry (Other)” with the corresponding separation code of JFC. Therefore, aside from the above mentioned administrative correction, we find no basis to recommend further relief in this case. ________________________________________________________________ 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- 2013-00007 in Executive Session on 26 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Feb 13. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Mar 13. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 31 Mar 13. 1 2