RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02476 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge for fraudulent entry be removed. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While at the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) for his physical he was given a packet to answer questions regarding his medical history. He told the MEPS liaison he had back pain when he performed extraneous activities and was told back pain was minor, and not a concern for enlistment, unless it had required surgery. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Oct 12. On 5 Dec 12, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge for fraudulent entry. The reason for this action was he intentionally concealed a prior service medical condition, which, if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of enlistment. The applicant had a history of chronic hip and back pain that was not documented on his DD Form 2807-1, Report of Medical History. On 5 Dec 12, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his right to consult with legal counsel or submit statements on his own behalf. On 6 Dec 12, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation, directing the applicant be issued an entry-level separation with a basis for discharge of fraudulent entry. On 10 Dec 12, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service, and was credited with 1 month and 25 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Soon after entering basic training, the applicant was seen at the clinic for chronic hip and back pain that became worse with vigorous physical activity and he could no longer attend basic training. He stated he had been in pain for as long as he could remember, but he did not disclose this during his MEPS physical because the recruiter indicated that only surgeries should be disclosed and that pain was not important. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the medical processing of his discharge. Based on 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 indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant’s commander notified him on 5 Dec 12 he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for entry-level separation (Fraudulent Entry) for deliberately concealing a prior service medical condition. The applicant’s SF Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, shows that a physician diagnosed the applicant with a condition which existed prior to enlistment and disqualified him for enlistment. The applicant’s service characterization is correct as indicated on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant had only 50 days of continuous active service when the discharge was initiated. Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of 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. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The separation program designator (SPD) code, narrative reason for separation, and character of service are correct as indicated on the applicant’s DD Form 214. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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. 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 the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) 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-2014-02476 in Executive Session on 19 Mar 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02476 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jun 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 26 Jun 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 30 Jun 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.