RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02831
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  15 Mar 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His entry level separation for fraudulent entry into the  military  be
changed to a medical discharge, or to  any  other  reason  other  than
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He informed his recruiter of  his  physical  condition;  however,  the
recruiter advised him that he  should  remain  silent  and  create  an
excuse regarding the scar on his knee.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, congressional correspondence, and copies of his  separation
documents.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17  Mar  04  for  a
period of four years in the grade of airman.

On 8 Apr 04, the  applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending the applicant  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for
fraudulent entry.  The reason for this action was that  the  applicant
intentionally concealed a prior service medical  condition,  which  if
revealed, could have resulted in the rejection of his enlistment.  The
Air Force discovered he had left knee  pain.   The  medical  condition
could have rendered him ineligible to enlist in the  Air  Force.   The
applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and  that  an  entry
level separation would be recommended.

On 8 Apr 04,  the  Office  of  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
discharge case file to  be  legally  sufficient  and  recommended  the
applicant be separated with an entry level separation.  The  discharge
authority approved the discharge action and directed the applicant  be
given an entry level separation.

On 12 Apr 04, the applicant was separated under the provisions of  AFI
36-3208 (Fraudulent Entry into Military Service) with an  entry  level
separation.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Medical  Consultant  recommended  denial  noting  the   applicant
received an entry level separation for fraudulent enlistment.   Airmen
are in entry-level status during the  first  180  days  of  continuous
active military service, and if administratively separated during this
period, they receive an entry-level separation.  This  discharge  does
not attempt to characterize the type of service as either good or bad.
 Fraudulent entry is one involving deliberate deception on the part of
the member.  An airman may be discharged for fraudulent entry based on
the procurement of a  fraudulent  enlistment  or  period  of  military
service through any deliberate material  misrepresentation,  omission,
or concealment that if known at the time of enlistment or entry into a
period of military service, might have  resulted  in  rejection.   The
fraud may occur at any time  in  the  enlistment  process.   Erroneous
enlistment is one that would not have occurred had the relevant  facts
been known by the Air Force and it was not the  result  of  fraudulent
conduct on the part of the member.

The Medical  Consultant  also  noted  the  applicant’s  contention  he
concealed his pre-service knee surgery on the advice of his recruiter.
 However when he completed his medical screening forms,  he  certified
that the information he provided was complete, and  that  no  one  had
advised him to conceal or falsify any information  about  his  medical
history.  This screening form also clearly warned about the  potential
consequences of making a false statement on the official document that
results  in  selection  for  enlistment.   According  to  the  Medical
Consultant, the action and disposition in this case  were  proper  and
equitable  reflecting  compliance  with  Air  Force  directives   that
implement the law.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is  at  Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  26
Aug 05 for review and response.  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 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  by  the  same  not  to
reveal it.  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.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, on 12 Apr 04, he was
separated under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Secretarial Authority),
with a separation code of “KFF.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-02831 in Executive Session on 12 Oct 05, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
      Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Aug 04, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 23 Aug 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Aug 05.




                                   MARILYN M. THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair




AFBCMR BC-2004-02831




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:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , be corrected to show that, on 12 Apr 04, he was
separated under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Secretarial Authority),
with a separation code of “KFF.”





    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency