RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-03392

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her uncharacterized service be changed.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was released from the military due to being injured during her technical school training.  She would like to be able to use her GI Bill benefits.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 19 May 09.

On 29 Sep 09, the applicant’s commander notified her that she was being recommended for discharge from the Air Force for erroneous enlistment.  The specific reason for the action was that, she was diagnosed with chronic bilateral knee pain that existed prior to her entering the military.  On that same date, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action, and waived her right to consult with legal counsel or submit statements in her own behalf.

On 1 Oct 09, the case was found legally sufficient and on 2 Oct 09, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation.

On 5 Oct 09, the applicant received an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service.  Her narrative reason for separation is “Erroneous Entry (Other).”  She was credited with 4 months and 17 days of total active service.   

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:

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denial indicating the application is untimely.  Additionally, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the type of separation, SPD code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority.

The medical authorities concluded that the applicant had a pre-existing condition that would have precluded her from joining the Air Force had this condition been made known at the time of her enlistment.  

AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 5.14, Erroneous Enlistment states “Errors in enlistment process occur when the Air Force does not have the true facts or does not take the right action.  An airman is subject to discharge for erroneous enlistment, reenlistment, or extension of enlistment if:

5.14.1. It would not have occurred had the relevant facts been known by the Air Force and the eligibility criteria of AFIs 36-2002 (formerly AFR 33-3) and 36-2606 (formerly AFR 35-16, volume 1), had been followed.  

5.14.2. It was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the member; and

5.14.3. The defect is unchanged in any material respect.”

Airmen are given entry-level separation (ELS) with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize a member’s limited service when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of active service.  Therefore, the uncharacterized character of service which resulted from the erroneous enlistment on her DD Form 214 is correct.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM 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 13 Jan 16 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 is 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its 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-2015-03392 in Executive Session on 13 Oct 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				   Panel Chair
				   Member
				   Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 15, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 29 Dec 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Jan 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.