RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04841 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry level separation be changed to an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge for fraudulent enlistment is unjust because he enlisted with a waiver for the condition that led to his discharge. He attempted to provide the evidence that his enlistment was not fraudulent. However, he was ordered to accept the proceedings without protest. His status as a basic trainee made it impossible for him to present his case; therefore, he was discharged without due process. The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because he cannot reenlist, and has been declined financial aid and health care benefits. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 March 2003, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. The applicant’s SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 14 March 2003, indicated that he was diagnosed with Bicuspid Aortic Valve with Aortic Stenosis, which existed prior to enlistment. On 20 March 2003, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.14, with an “Entry Level Separation.” The specific reason for this action was that a medical narrative summary dated 14 March 2003, found that he did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist. The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of Bicuspid Aortic Valve with Aortic Stenosis. On 20 March 2003, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and indicated that he waived his option to consult with counsel and his right to submit statements in his behalf. On 21 March 2003, the Chief, Adverse Actions found the discharge legally sufficient. On 21 March 2003, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be administratively discharged with an “Entry Level Separation.” On 25 March 2003, the applicant received an “Entry Level Separation” with uncharacterized service. The narrative reason for separation is “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards.” He was credited with 22 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. It has been almost 12 years since the applicant’s discharge; therefore, his submission is not timely. Medical authorities concluded that the applicant’s complaints of shortness of breath since his arrival at Basic Military Training (BMT) was a disqualifying physical condition that did not meet Air Force standards. Medical authorities further concluded that his condition was not aggravated by training beyond the normal progression of his ailment. The applicant was only on active duty for 16 days when the discharge action was initiated; therefore, he must be separated with an entry level discharge in accordance with AFI 36-3208. Airmen are given entry-level separation and/or uncharacterized service characterizations when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense 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 applicant contends that he was discharged for fraudulent entry into the Air Force. However, his assertion is incorrect. He was discharged for failed medical physical standards for entry into the Air Force as indicated in his master of personnel records. This type of separation falls under the category of erroneous enlistment, not fraudulent enlistment. A complete copy of the DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The discharge to include the type of separation was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant’s records reveal that he had Aortic Stenosis, which existed prior to service. He was originally cleared at the Military Entrance Processing Station without a waiver and was later disqualified by SGPS during BMT. A complete copy of the SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 18 June 2015, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, Correction of Military Records and AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04841 in Executive Session on 4 August 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04841 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 November 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 14 January 2015. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 29 May 2015. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 June 2015.