AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  9 7 - 0  d44 1 2 ?,a?fj 

COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 

The fraudulent entry reason for discharge be dropped. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
Applicant%  mother  contends that  her  son  (applicant) was  charged 
with  fraudulent entry  into the military  and  it  was  her  ignorance 
and  negligence  that  caused  his  discharge.  She  stated  applicant 
attended  a  graduation party  in  June  1995, where  the police  were 
called,  and  the  applicant  received  a  violation  for  underage 
drinking.  He  went  to  court, paid  a  fine, attended  classes  and 
received a three-year probation period  (no probation officer). 
She further stated she was the one who  filled out his application 
papers.  Where it asked about your police record, she answered ''no1' 
to the first three questions.  When it asked about druq or alcohol 
charges she answered 
l'yes. 
She looked for her son' s court paper 
but didn't find it. 
She tried to remember when he went to court. 
She  wrote  the  date, 
type  of  violation,  and  what  court. 
She 
answered  ''no  to  the 
criminal  question because  she  did  not  know 
underage drinking was 
a criminal offense.  She does not  know how 
she wrote the wrong violation date. 
In support of applicant's request, his mother provided her expanded 
comments, and  four  letters  of  character  reference/recommendation 
from applicant's state representative and acquaintances.  (Exhibit 
A) 

c 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
On 5 March 1997, applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular 
Air Force for a period of four years. 
On  28 March  1997, the  squadron commander initiated administrative 
discharge  action  against  the  applicant  for  defective  enlistment. 
The specific reason for the proposed action was that applicant had 
been charged with underage drinking and paid a fine and court costs 
of  approximately $290  -  $300.  (The date of  the underage drinking 

. 

listed on the SF 8 6   (Questionnaire for National Security Positions) 
was incorrect.  It should have read 1995 instead of  1990.)  He was 
still on probation and the underage drinking offense was committed 
prior  to his entry  into the Delayed Enlistment  Program.  Had  the 
Air  Force  known  of  the  offense  it  could  have  rendered  him 
ineligible  to  enlist.  On  28  March  1997,  applicant  acknowledged 
receipt  of  the  discharge notification.  He  waived  his sption to 
consult  counsel  and  waived  his  right  to  submit  statements  for 
consideration.  The  attorney  advisor  reviewed  the  case  file  and 
found  it  to  be  legally  sufficient  to  support  separation.  On 
1 April  1997,  the  discharge  authority  approved  an  entry  level 
separation. 
On 3 April  1997, applicant received an uncharacterized entry level 
separation,  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,  by  reason  of 
fraudulent entry  into military  service.  He  was  credited with 'no 
active Federal service. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Programs  and  Procedures  Branch,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  this 
application  and  recommended  denial.  DPPRS  stated  the  case  was 
reviewed  for  separation  processing  and  there  are  no  errors  or 
irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant.  The reason 
for separation is correct because the basis  for discharge was  for 
fraudulent  entry. 
The  records  indicate  applicant's  military 
service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.  (Exhibit C) 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant's mother  provided  a statement  from  the  deputy  clerk  of 
the  court  explaining  the  violation  and  probation. 
Her  son I s 
probation was listed as "Inactive Probation" and he did not report 
to any probation officer.  This is the reason he did not think his 
probation would cause any problems. 

Being civilians, applicant and his parents were not aware that you 
could not join the military while on probation. 
The complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The  applicant has  exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing 

1. 
law or regulations. 
2 .   The application was timely filed. 

2 

AFBCMR  97-02801 

3 .   Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to demonstrate 
the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice.  It  appears  that 
responsible  officials  applied  appropriate  standards  in  effecting 
applicant's discharge, and we do not  find persuasive evidence that 
pertinent  regulations  were  violated  or  that  applicant  was  not 
afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. 
However, we  believe  there may  have been mitigating cir-stances; 
specifically,  the  information provided  on  the  Standard  Form  8 6  
(Questionnaire for National Security Positions) with respect to the 
applicant's police record was furnished by the applicant's mother, 
who completed the application for him.  The applicant was required 
to report all of his arrests, regardless of whether the record in 
his  case  had  been  sealed  or  otherwise  stricken  from  the  court 
record,  and  the  actions  taken  with  respect  to  the  arrest(s). 
However, we  believe  there is  some doubt  that  applicant willfully 
intended to deceive the government by not disclosing the fact that 
he  received  three  years  of  probation  for  an  underage  drinking 
offense in August  1995, and that he was still serving on probation 
at  the  time of  his  enlistment  in the Air  Force.  In view of  the 
foregoing, and in the absence of any other derogatory information, 
we believe it would be  an injustice for the applicant to continue 
to  suffer  the  adverse  effects  of  the  narrative  reason  for 
discharge.  Therefore, we  conclude  that  the  applicant  should  be 
given the benefit  of  the doubt  and that  the  narrative reason for 
discharge should be changed to IIConvenience of the Government.Il 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
The pertinent military  records of  the Department of  the Air  Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be  corrected to show that on 3  April  1997, 
he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 3 6 - 3 2 0 8 ,   by reason of 
Vonvenience of the Government.Il 

The following members  of  the Board considered this application in 
Executive  Session  on  10 March  1998, under  the  provisions  of  AFI 
3 6 - 2 6 0 3  : 

Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair 
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member 
Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson, Member 

3 

AFBCMR  97-02801 

All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended. 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

T h e  

DD Form 149, dated 12 Sep 97, w/atchs. 
Applicantis Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit A. 
Exhibit B. 
Exhibit  C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated  9 Oct  97. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 Oct  97. 
Exhibit E. 

Letter, Applicant's Mother, dated 20 N o v   97. 
, w/atchs. 

- 

f l  

Panel Chai 

4 

AFBCMR  97-02801 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON DC 

JUN 1 2  1998 

Office  of the Assistant Secretary 

AFBCMR 97-02801 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction 
of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 
116), it is directed that: 

cords of the Department of the Air Force relating t- 
d to show that on 3 April 1997, he was discharged under the 

y reason of “Convenience of the Government.” 

Air Force Review Boards Agency