RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03495 

 COUNSEL: 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His narrative reason for separation be changed from “Fraudulent 
Entry into Military Service” to Erroneous Enlistment or 
“Disability Existing at Time of Enlistment.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His entry into the Air Force was not in any way procured by 
fraud. He has little recollection of it but, early in his 
childhood he apparently had a period of bed-wetting. His parents 
told him that this condition had completely resolved by the age 
of seven. When he reported to the Military Entrance Processing 
Station (MEPS) to complete his administrative processing for 
enlistment, he had absolutely no recollection of a later 
instance of urinary incontinence that occurred during sleep when 
he was 15 or 16 years old. When he filled out the required 
paperwork and answered the questions on the forms at MEPS, he 
did so honestly and to the best of his recollection, knowledge 
and belief. 

 

When he was at Basic Training and had problems he called his 
parents to discuss what was happening and talk about the 
examinations he was required to undergo. During that phone 
conversation, his parents told him about the incident when he 
was 15 or 16 years old. When he reported his problem to the 
medical authorities he was questioned about the timing of his 
incidents prior to his enlistment and responded truthfully, 
including reporting what his parents told him on the phone as 
well as the fact that he has had no other incident between that 
time and the time of his enlistment in the Air Force. With the 
knowledge gained from his parents and hindsight he agrees that 
his enlistment without a waiver may have been erroneous, but he 
had no intent to deceive and did not intentionally do so. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant submits his counsel’s 
brief with attachments. 

 

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

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 March 2009. 

 

On 3 April 2009, the applicant was notified by his commander 
that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 Military Retirements and 
Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 
5.15, under Discharge for Fraudulent Entry. The specific reason 
for this action was: the applicant disclosed a history of 
enuresis that was not documented on his DD Form 2807-2, Medical 
Prescreen of Medical History Report. 

 

On 3 April 2009, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and was advised of his right to 
consult legal counsel as well as submit a statement to the 
commander for consideration. The applicant waived his right to 
consult legal counsel and submit a statement on his behalf. 

 

Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient the 
discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the 
applicant be discharged with an entry level separation. The 
applicant was discharged on 8 April 2009, with a narrative 
reason for separation of “Fraudulent Entry into Military 
Service” and a Separation Code of “JDA.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends approval. The Medical 
Consultant states, Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 
6130.03, Medical Standards for Appointment, Enlistment or 
Induction in the Military Services, lists medical conditions 
that are disqualifying for service entry. Under the urinary 
system, a “history of enuresis or incontinence of urine, or the 
control of it with medication or other treatment past the 15th 
birthday is disqualifying. Furthermore, when enuresis is the 
cause for release from military service it is characterized as a 
disorder not considered a disability. Specifically, under DoD 
Instruction 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, Enclosure 
5, it is listed among certain “conditions, circumstances, and 
defects of a developmental nature designated by the Secretary of 
Defense [that] do not constitute a physical disability and are 
not ratable in the absence of an underlying causative disorder. 
If there is a causative disorder it will be rated in accordance 
with other provisions of this Instruction.” The evaluating 
urologist found no organic basis for the applicant’s enuresis, 
but did prescribe medication to control the condition. 

 


According to the letter from the applicant’s urologist, the 
applicant reported he had forgotten about the bedwetting until 
he was later reminded by his parents while he was being 
evaluated at the Air Force Basic Training. Thus when he 
reported to complete his MEPS medical documents, he had 
“absolutely no recollection of a later instance of urinary 
incontinence that occurred during sleep” when he was 15 years of 
age. It is on this basis that the applicant and his legal 
counsel contend that characterizing the applicant’s service 
entry as fraudulent, or a deliberate failure to disclose, 
represents an implicit error if not injustice, or both. 

 

The Medical Consultant finds it unnecessarily detrimental, e.g., 
an injustice, to the applicant to send a lifelong message that 
he fraudulently entered the Air Force for a personal medical 
issue of this nature, which is likely to affect his future 
employability or other instances where truthfulness is critical 
for acceptance; particularly where there is some doubt raised as 
to whether he was aware of the recurrence at age 15; lending 
some credence to the statements submitted by his parents, 
although not sworn or notarized. Thus if there is an error, the 
Medical Consultant prefers to render reasonable doubt in the 
applicant’s favor by changing the narrative reason for 
separation. The Medical Consultant recommends granting the 
applicant relief, in the interest of justice; by changing the 
record to reflect the narrative reason for his separation was 
due to “Erroneous Entry into Military Service” 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation (Exhibit D) was 
forwarded to the applicant’s counsel on 28 February 2012 for 
review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response 
has 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an injustice. After a review of 
the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission we believe 
that relief is warranted. In light of the BCMR Medical 
Consultant’s opinion and recommendation that the current 


narrative reason is unnecessarily detrimental for a personal 
medical issue of this nature and is likely to affect the 
applicant’s future employability, we are in agreement that it 
would be in the interest of justice to resolve any doubt in the 
applicant’s favor. Therefore, in the interest of equity and 
justice, his records should be corrected as indicated below. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with counsel will 
materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was 
discharged on 8 April 2009, with a narrative reason for 
separation of "Erroneous Entry," rather than "Fraudulent Entry," 
and a separation code of "JFC," rather than "JDA." 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered this application 
BC-2011-03495 in Executive Session on 8 May 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 August 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 

 15 February 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 28 February 2012. 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair