RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01523 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not provided legal counsel and was discharged for fraudulent entry due to his recruiter filling out his paperwork incorrectly. He provided his recruiter with all of the information related to his criminal background. When he later signed his contracts he believed everything was accurate. It was only after he received a decision from the review board that he noticed the wrong box was checked on his contract. The only thing he is guilty of is not being a smart airman and reading his enlistment contract thoroughly. He just wanted to serve his country and trusted his recruiter to complete the paperwork correctly.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 1 Oct 09, the applicant entered the Air Force Reserve. The applicant’s SF 86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions, was completed and did not indicate he had any criminal background. He signed the form indicating it was a true and accurate statement.

On 7 Jul 11, the Security Forces Manager notified the applicant’s commander after he failed to report for drill that a check of Pennsylvania Court Records identified 10 prior adverse adjudications against the applicant.

On 13 Aug 11, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for being arrested for disorderly conduct a violation of Article
92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

On 22 Sep 11, the applicant was notified by his commander he was no longer allowed to participate in any pay or points activities pending resolution of his separation action.

On 26 Sep 11, the applicant’s commander recommended he be separation for Fraudulent Entry in accordance with AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, Chapter 3, paragraph 3.15.4.

On 8 Jan 12, the discharge was found legally sufficient.
On 19 Jan 12, the discharge authority reviewed the case and concurred with the Staff Judge Advocate’s findings the applicant should be discharged based on Fraudulent Entry.

On 26 Sep 12, HQ ARFC/A1KK sent the applicant another memorandum of notification of initiation of separation.

On 29 Oct 12, the applicant submitted a personal statement in response to his discharge notification.

On 29 Jul 13, the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate completed a final review of the case and determined it was legally sufficient to proceed with administrative separation procedures.

On 1 Dec 13, the applicant was furnished a general, under honorable conditions discharge, for fraudulent entry, and was credited with four years and two months of service.

13 Mar 14, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DBR) concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was afforded full administrative due process. In view of these findings, the DRB concluded there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of his discharge and determined the discharge should remain the unchanged.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFRC/A1K recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant failed to review the Standard Form 96, Questionnaire for National Security Positions and was administratively discharged in accordance with AFI 36- 3209, based on Fraudulent Entry.

A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air  Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Dec 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. The applicant did not provide documentation or statements to substantiate his claims. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

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-2015-01523 in Executive Session on 8 Mar 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, , Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-01523 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 7 Apr 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFRC/A1K, dated 17 Dec 15. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Dec 15.