RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01815 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry-level separation on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be upgraded to allow him to re-enter the military. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unjustly discharged based on a medical diagnosis of asthma. After leaving the military, he went to a doctor who confirmed he had no signs of asthma. He has medical evidence which proves he does not have a respiratory condition. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 26 Mar 13. On 30 Apr 13, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge for fraudulent enlistment. The reason for this action was for intentionally concealing a prior service medical condition, which if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of enlistment. On 30 Apr 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his rights to consult with legal counsel or submit statements on his own behalf. On 2 May 13, the action was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority concurred with the commander’s recommendation. On 3 May 13, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized character of service and a narrative reason for separation of “Discharge Fraudulent Entry into Military Service (Medical).” Because the applicant was discharged for fraudulent entry, he was not credited any active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial as it pertains to the applicant’s medical diagnosis, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A review of the applicant’s records and medical notes reveal he was diagnosed with exercise induced asthma at age 14 for which he was given an inhaler, but stated he never used it. He started having symptoms during Basic Military Training (BMT) and was seen at the clinic where he was diagnosed with exercise-induced bronchospasm. The applicant stated that he understood the diagnosis and treatment plan and was subsequently processed for an entry-level separation. Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the separation was carried out in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his discharge to allow him to reenlist. The applicant was involuntarily discharged for Fraudulent Entry for intentionally concealing a prior service medical condition (Asthma related symptoms), which if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of his enlistment. Medical staff completed a chronological record of medical care form and provided to the commander information indicating that the applicant had a condition that was disqualifying for his enlistment. Furthermore, the applicant’s civilian medical records for this condition were both dated prior to his enlistment. Finally, the applicant was treated with inhalers and sent to Pulmonology as a civilian for exercise-induced asthma. This shows a pre-existing condition that was not disclosed prior to entering the military. Therefore, fraudulent enlistment was the correct basis for discharge. 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 continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code and narrative reason for separation are correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends approval of the applicant’s request to change his RE code and narrative reason for discharge to allow him to pursue re-enlistment. Based on the applicant’s clinical history from 2006 and his presentation during BMT, so soon after entering military service, it is more likely than not, his predisposition for a recurrent broncho- reactive response to exertion, as he self-reported, existed prior to entering military service. However, based upon the letter from the applicant’s mother and the reported lack of recollection of a breathing problem from the applicant, the Medical Consultant recommends reasonable doubt in favor of the applicant to change the narrative reason for discharge to Failed Medical Procurement Standards with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JFW; noting the parent had greater accountability in the case. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 5 Mar 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an error or injustice to warrant correcting the applicant’s records to make him immediately eligible for enlistment. 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 AETC/SGPS and 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. 4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting some degree of relief. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation, we are of the opinion there was no deliberate deception on the part of the applicant upon his entry into the Air Force. For this reason and to prevent a further burden with the stigma associated with the narrative reason currently reflected on his DD Form 214, we recommend it be changed to “Failed Medical Procurement Standards.” Further, we note that because the applicant was originally discharged for fraudulent enlistment, that his period of service was not creditable as active service. However, had the applicant instead originally been separated due to failing medical procurement standards, his period of service would have been reflected on his DD Form 214 as creditable active service. Therefore, in view of the fact that we have concluded that his record should be corrected to reflect that he was furnished an entry-level separation for failing medical procurement standards, we believe it also appropriate to further correct his records to reflect that his brief period of service was creditable active service. While we note that these corrections will likely not result in him being eligible for enlistment, these corrections may allow him to pursue an enlistment waiver, provided he no longer suffers from a disqualifying condition. Whether or not the applicant is successful in obtaining a waiver for enlistment is based entirely on the needs of the Air Force and our recommendation in no way constitutes any guarantee of future service. While we note this is not the relief the applicant seeks, we believe it is proper and fitting. Accordingly, we recommend his record be corrected to the extent indicated below. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show the following: a. On 3 May 13, he was issued a narrative reason for separation of “Failed Medical Procurement Standards” and a separation program designator (SPD) code of “JFW” in conjunction with his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service. b. Block 12(c), Net Active Service this Period, of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect he was credited with 1 month and 19 days of total active service. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01815 in Executive Session on 22 Apr 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01815 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Apr 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 9 May 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 14 May 14. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFBCMR, Medical Consultant, dated 27 Feb 15. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Mar 15.