RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02031 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry in Military Service) and Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “JDA” be changed to reflect a medical discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has always had mild asthmatic symptoms and when it started acting up in basic training he was appalled. His Army recruiter advised him that he did not have asthma and doctors in his town had made a mistake. He only wanted to serve his country and would still like the chance to serve in some capacity with the federal government, specifically, the United States Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). He should have been a little more honest about his past with asthma; however, after talking with the Army recruiter he was really convinced that he did not have asthma. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 10 May 11, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 23 Jun 11, the applicant's commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for Fraudulent Entry for intentionally concealing a prior service medical condition which, if revealed, could have resulted in rejection of his enlistment. Specifically, the medical evaluation report, dated 20 Jun 11, indicated the applicant was diagnosed with asthma, which existed prior to service and his failure to disclose the condition. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed an uncharacterized entry level separation. On 27 Jun 11, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry- level separation, by reason of “Fraudulent Entry into Military Service,” and was issued an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service). ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, stating, in part, the documentation on file in the master personnel records supports the basis for discharge and the applicant's entry-level service characterization. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting a change to his discharge. Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined that if a member served less than 180 days of continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and is in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 26 Nov 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was given an entry level separation for fraudulent entry into military service based on his intentional concealment of a pre-service medical condition, which if revealed, could have resulted in the rejection of his enlistment. The applicant contends he informed his recruiter of his condition but was advised that his doctor made a mistake on his diagnosis. No evidence has been presented which would lead us to believe the applicant’s separation was improper or contrary to the prevailing directive in effect at the time. Therefore, we find no basis to recommend favorable action on his request to change his entry level separation to a medical discharge. Notwithstanding this, after a thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this case, we are sufficiently persuaded the applicant may not have been properly advised by his recruiter regarding the revelation of his pre- service medical condition. Furthermore, while we note the applicant did conceal his condition, we are of the opinion the action was not based on a conscious, deliberate attempt to deceive, but was rather an act of poor judgment. In view of the above, we believe it would be in the interest of justice to change his narrative reason for separation to one that is more innocuous. Accordingly, we recommend the applicant’s narrative reason for separation be changed to Secretarial Authority. Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 27 June 2011, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, (Secretarial Authority), with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “KFF.” ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02031 in Executive Session on 15 January 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 May 12. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 8 Nov 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 12. Panel Chair