RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04991 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry in Military Service – Board Waiver) along with the corresponding separation code of “HDA” be changed. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She voluntarily accepted the administrative discharge under the impression that her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with her 12 Oct 12 separation, would reflect that she served honorably and that she was separated based on administrative reasons. She feels that she was misled and believes this action will negatively impact her employment and her ability to lead a productive life. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 17 Sep 12, the squadron commander notified the applicant of administrative discharge action for deliberate concealment of the fact that she used marijuana more than one time and used ecstasy at least three times, procuring herself to be enlisted as an airman basic in the United States Air Force and thereafter receive pay and allowances under the enlistment so procured. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was advised of her right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in her own behalf. On 21 Sep 12, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver of an administrative discharge board contingent upon receiving an honorable service characterization of discharge. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the basis for separation. On 4 Oct 12, the discharge authority accepted the conditional waiver and directed the applicant be discharged with an Honorable discharge without Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R). On 12 Oct 12, the applicant was discharged by reason of “Fraudulent Entry into Military Service,” with service characterized as honorable. Other relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, 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. She provided no facts warranting a change to her separation. The suitability of persons to serve in the Air Force is judged by their conduct and ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. The separation of members who fail to meet standards of performance, conduct, or discipline promotes Air Force readiness and strengthens our standards of military service. Based on the misconduct listed above, the applicant's conduct is not compatible with military standards and shows a repeated lack of credibility. The applicant lost her security clearance and, due to past drug use and misrepresentations, will not be able to obtain a clearance in the future. AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.15, states that airmen may be discharged for fraudulent entry based on procurement of an enlistment through any deliberate, material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment that, if known at the time of enlistment, might have resulted in rejection. Airmen found to be subject to discharge under this section may be granted a waiver to stay in the Air Force under limited circumstances; however, a waiver is not guaranteed. In deciding whether to recommend a waiver, the regulation directs the commander to look at the type of fraud and any extenuating circumstances. Therefore, her narrative reason for separation is correct and 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 11 Jan 13 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting a change to the applicant’s narrative reason for separation and the corresponding separation code. The applicant states that she was misled to believe her narrative reason for separation would reflect “administrative reasons.” However, she has not provided sufficient evidence which would lead us to believe that she was miscounseled or that her narrative reason for separation is in error or contrary to the provisions of the governing policy. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air force office of responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that she has suffered from an error or injustice. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting this application. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2012-04991 in Executive Session on 6 Aug 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Oct 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 19 Dec 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jan 13.