RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02336
                                             INDEX CODE:  110.02

                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO



MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 JANUARY 2007


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be changed to honorable so that he can reenter the military
as an officer.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was pulled from his training squadron for  possible  dehydration.   At
the hospital, they ran tests on him, and it was determined that he had  a
very slight case of asthma.  Prior to basic training he had  no  symptoms
whatsoever of asthma.  The doctors at Lackland advised  him  that  either
the weather or other stressful conditions could have  possibly  triggered
his asthma.  The Chaplain referred him to  Behavioral  Analysis  Services
(BAS) for a mental health evaluation.  The mental health  evaluator  said
that he was a little stressed, but he had no symptoms of any major mental
disorders, including depression.  He was asked if  he  had  ever  seen  a
psychiatrist, not clearly understanding the term, he answered “yes,” as a
child he went to court-ordered family counseling, after his parents  were
divorced.  He did not see a psychiatrist, but  rather  a  therapist,  and
only on one  occasion.   It  was  recommended  that  he  be  returned  to
training.  Upon returning to his Squadron he  was  advised  that  he  was
being processed for discharge for fraudulent entry,  for  not  disclosing
his past mental conditions.

He had planned  on  making  the  military  his  whole  life  and  career.
According to testing, he is borderline asthma, and it has never  bothered
him since he has lived in Arkansas.  He regrets that he did  not  clearly
understand the term “psychiatrist” in a sense that he confused it with  a
therapist.  He did not fraudulently enlist in  the  Air  Force,  and  has
never been to a psychiatrist.

In support of his request, the applicant submitted a copy of his  DD Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge  from  Active  Duty,  a  medical
statement from his pediatrician, a signed statement from  his  mother,  a
statement  from  a  licensed  psychologist,  and  copies  of   separation
documents.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 Jul 03, for a period of
six years, in the grade of airman basic.

On 25 Aug 03, the squadron commander notified the applicant that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air  Force  for  fraudulent  entry
into the military.  If approved, his discharge would be described  as  an
entry-level separation and he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the
Air Force.  The commander’s reason for the proposed action was  that  the
applicant failed to indicate that he  had  a  history  of  mental  health
treatment, which if revealed,  could  have  rendered  him  ineligible  to
enlist.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification on 25 Aug
03, and waived his option to consult legal counsel and submit  statements
on his own behalf.

On 25 Aug 03, the Air Education and Training  Command  Chief  of  Adverse
Actions found the case file legally sufficient to support separation.  On
26 Aug 03, the discharge authority approved the  discharge  and  directed
the  applicant  be  discharged  with   an   uncharacterized   entry-level
separation.

Applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on   28  Aug
03, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason  of  fraudulent  entry
into military service, and was issued an RE  Code  of  2C  [involuntarily
separated with an entry-level  separation].   Since  his  enlistment  was
considered fraudulent, his total active service was non-creditable.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.   The
applicant was administratively discharged with an entry-level  separation
for fraudulent entry into military service  for  failing  to  report  his
history of psychological counseling.  The applicant asserts he  was  seen
only one time for mental health counseling; however, at the time  of  his
Air Force mental evaluation he reported being seen from age 12 to 15.  He
also submitted a medical statement that states he was seen from  1998  to
2000 for symptoms diagnosed as Adjustment Disorder with  Depressed  Mood.
The applicant asserts that the reason he answered  the  question  in  the
negative was because it was not a psychiatrist, it was one time,  and  he
did not have a serious mental illness.  However, the question on DD  Form
2807-1 is very clear inquiring  about  “counseling  of  any  type.”   The
applicant also reported  pre-service  breathing  problems  to  Air  Force
medical providers that he denied  on  his  enlistment  examination  form.
Individuals  who  gain  entry  into  military   service   by   concealing
potentially  disqualifying  information  are  not  suited  for   military
service.  In addition, the applicant’s abnormal  bronchoprovocation  test
is also considered disqualifying  as  it  demonstrates  the  presence  of
reactive airways disease even though he may not manifest symptoms  severe
enough to be diagnosed as asthma.  Although the applicant  may  not  have
had asthma in the strictest definition before entering the  military,  he
experienced symptoms of exercise induced shortness of breath both  before
and after entering the service.   The  applicant’s  symptoms  before  and
during  training  combined  with  his  positive  bronchoprovocation  test
indicate that he is at higher risk for recurrent problems when  subjected
to the rigors of military  operational  environments.   The  evidence  of
record shows the applicant was having  difficulty  coping  with  military
training early in basic  training  and  that  his  history  of  recurrent
Adjustment Disorder is unsuiting for military service and indicates he is
at risk for recurrent symptoms of Adjustment Disorder when exposed to the
rigors of military service.  The fact that he may be functioning well  at
this time at home does not predict that  he  will  respond  well  to  the
stresses of  military  operations,  deployment,  or  combat  when  he  is
separated from his familiar surroundings  and  usual  support  system  of
family and friends.  His past experience of difficulty coping with  basic
training is predictive of an unacceptable risk for recurrence of symptoms
of Adjustment Disorder.  The preponderance of the evidence of record does
not support the applicant’s request for  change  of  records  that  would
enable him to reenter military service.   Action and disposition in  this
case are 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:

On 23 Aug 06, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,  a  reply  has
not been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR  Medical  Consultant  and
adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that  the  applicant
has not been the victim of an error  or  injustice.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary,  we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice; that  the  application  was
denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number      BC-2005-
02336 in Executive Session on 28 September 2006, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number   BC-2005-
02336 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Aug 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 22 Aug 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Aug 06.




                                             JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                             Panel Chair