RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02295 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation, erroneous entry, be changed. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was hurt during technical training not prior to entering the Air Force. In support of her request, the applicant submits excerpts from her master personnel records and excerpts of her medical records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 8 February 2011. On 30 November 2011, she was notified of her commander’s intent to discharge her from the Air Force for erroneous enlistment. Specifically, the applicant was diagnosed with Snapping Hip Syndrome, a condition that existed prior to her service. The applicant acknowledged her commander’s intent, her right to counsel and to submit matters on her behalf: she waived her right to counsel and submit matters. The discharge was found legally sufficient on 6 December 2011. On 7 December 2011, the commander approved the separation. She received an honorable discharge and her narrative reason for separation was listed as erroneous enlistment. She was credited with serving 10 months and 1 day of active duty. On 6 November 2013, AFPC/DPSOE verified the applicant should have been promoted to the rank of airman first class/E-3 after 20 weeks of service as she had graduated from basic military training. The Military Personnel Data System has been corrected to reflect her rank as an airman first class with a date of rank of 21 October 2011. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. Airmen are subject to discharge for erroneous enlistment when errors in the enlistment process occur. Errors are when the Air Force does not have the true facts or does not take the right action. Airmen are subject to discharge from an erroneous enlistment if: it would not have occurred had the relevant facts been known by the Air Force and the eligibility criteria of AFI 36-2002 had been followed; or it was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the member; or, the defect is unchanged in any material respect. The applicant’s chronological record of medical care, dated 3 November 2011 states she was diagnosed with Snapping Hip Syndrome; a condition so severe it prevents continued training. The medical record indicates the applicant did experience symptoms prior to entering military service and the treating physician’s assistant, with the concurrence of the staff physician, concluded that the applicant’s condition existed prior to service. The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because she was diagnosed with Snapping Hip Syndrome. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of her enlistment, she would not have been allowed entry into the military. Based on the documentation in the master personnel file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She has reviewed her medical records and does not see where it states that she experienced symptoms prior to service. She was under the impression she would be allowed to reenter the Air Force 6 months after being discharged. She was denied reentry because of her narrative reason for separation, erroneous enlistment. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and her contentions were duly noted. However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions and the documentation presented in support of her appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by AFPC/DPSOS. Therefore, we agree with their opinion and recommendation and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that relief beyond that already administratively granted is not warranted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02295 in Executive Session on 6 February 2014 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 May 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 28 Jun 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 13. Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atchs. 2