RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00566 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She wishes to have her discharge upgraded to honorable so that she can use her education benefits to further her education. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________ ______________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant's military personnel records, she initially entered the Regular Air Force on 28 Aug 07. On 1 Nov 07, the applicant was notified by her commander of his intent to recommend her discharge for Erroneous Enlistment - failure to meet Air Force physical standards. The reason for the action was that, according to a 30 Oct 07 medical narrative summary, the applicant was ineligible to meet the minimum medical standards to enlist due to her diagnosis of Patella Femoral Syndrome. If the relevant facts of the medical condition had been made known beforehand she would not have been permitted to enlist. On 7 Nov 07, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service for failed medical/ physical procurement standards. She was credited with two months and ten days of total active service. On 28 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). ______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Medical authorities concluded that the applicant had a pre-existing medical condition that would have precluded her from enlisting had this condition been made known in advance. Additionally, since the applicant was on active duty for only 66 days when the discharge action was initiated, she was furnished an entry-level separation in accordance with AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.2.2. Airmen are given Entry-level separation/Uncharacterized service 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 of continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, indicating that the member has no qualifying service for Montgomery GI Bill benefits as the only period of service that qualifies enlisted members is service that occurs at the first duty location and beyond. These benefits are based on months of qualifying service and require the member to pay in advance. The applicant met neither of these requirements to qualify for the GI Bill. Under the Post- 9/11 GI Bill, a member can qualify due to a service-connected disability, but must have served 30 qualifying days on active duty. The applicant was unable to complete basic military training or technical training and does not qualify for the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Even if the character of service is changed to honorable, the applicant has no qualifying period of active duty service. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit E. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 25 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F). ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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 AFPC/DPSOR and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-00566 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 28 Feb 14. Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 10 Mar 14. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Jul 14.