Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03327
Original file (BC-2012-03327.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03327 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His official records be corrected to change his Narrative Reason 
for Separation of “Fraudulent Entry” on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did not know he had asthma prior to joining the Air Force. 
He jokingly explained that running, playing, and eating at the 
same time as a child caused him to have to catch his breath, as 
would any child. He successfully completed basic training and 
has never been in any situation where breathing was an issue 
prior to joining the military. He would like to re-enter the 
Air Force or another branch of the service. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant initially entered the Air Force on 27 Nov 01. 

 

On 17 Jan 02, as documented on his Chronological Record of 
Medical Care, the applicant admitted to his health provider that 
he has experienced shortness of breath since age 10. 

 

On 29 Jan 02, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for Fraudulent 
Entry. The reason for the was that on or about 27 Nov 01, the 
applicant was sworn into the Air Force after informing the 
Military Entry Processing Station (MEPS) that he had no prior 
medical conditions. The applicant then entered Basic Military 
Training and was again asked if he had any changes in his 
military medical history or anything he did not tell the 
recruiter of MEPS, and the applicant checked “No” to all. The 
applicant falsified his Standard Form 93, Report of Medical 
History, by not informing MEPS he had asthma prior to joining 


the military, which constituted falsification of government 
documents. 

 

The applicant acknowledged the notification and waived his right 
to counsel and to submit a statement on his own behalf. 

 

On 4 Feb 02, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
discharged with an Entry-level separation (ELS) for Fraudulent 
Entry. 

 

On 7 Feb 02, the applicant was furnished an ELS, with an 
uncharacterized service, a Reenty Code of 2C (Involuntary 
separation with Honorable discharge), a Narrative Reason for 
Separation of “Fraudulent Entry,” and was credited with 3 months 
and 17 days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any 
evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in 
the discharge process. The applicant falsified his Standard 
Form 93, Report of Medical History, by not informing the MEPS 
that he had asthma prior to joining the military. This 
constitutes falsification of government documents. The 
documentation on file in the master personnel records supports 
the basis for discharge. The discharge was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 11 Oct 12 for review and comment within 30 days. 
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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an 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 Air Force office of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-03327 in Executive Session on 28 Feb 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 12, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 19 Sep 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBD, dated 11 Oct 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01153

    Original file (BC 2014 01153.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He joined the Air Force right out of High School to help serve his country. After following a doctor’s recommendation to be tested for asthma, he was shocked to be diagnosed with asthma. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibit C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04894

    Original file (BC 2013 04894.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04894 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation program designator (SPD) code of “JDA,” narrative reason for separation of “fraudulent entry into military service,” and reentry (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with uncharacterized character of service) be changed to allow him to reenlist. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02092

    Original file (BC-2003-02092.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical standards for enlistment (and for continued service) indicate that asthma, including reactive airways disease, exercise induced bronchospasm or asthmatic bronchitis, reliably diagnosed at any age is disqualifying for enlistment. None of the other conditions documented in the applicant’s records would have entitled him to disability benefits. He states that he did not have any knee problems or hand discomfort prior to basic training.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00559

    Original file (BC 2014 00559.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It should be noted that the applicant completed Basic Military Training and was attending technical training school at the time she was identified as having asthma. On 20 Sep 13, the applicant’s examining provider entered the following comment in her medical record “Patient has a history of EPTE [existed prior to enlistment] asthma. While the Board notes the additional testing and associated documentation the applicant completed at Lackland Air Force Base, we concur with the opinion of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05694

    Original file (BC 2013 05694.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. DPSOR states the medical authorities concluded that the applicant had a pre-existing condition that would have precluded him from joining the Air Force had this condition been made known at the time of his enlistment. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01815

    Original file (BC 2014 01815.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 May 13, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized character of service and a narrative reason for separation of “Discharge Fraudulent Entry into Military Service (Medical).” Because the applicant was discharged for fraudulent entry, he was not credited any active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03603

    Original file (BC 2014 03603.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03603 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation of “Fraudulent entry into military service” be changed to “General separation.” His Reentry (RE) Code of “2C” which denotes “Involuntary separation honorable discharge or entry level separation without characterization of service” be changed to designate a general separation. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702355

    Original file (9702355.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    If, as the applicant contends, the recruiter then had him fill out a second medical history form concealing this history of early childhood asthma, the applicant should not have been considered a fraudulent entry, but rather an erroneous entry level separation should have been the reason for his dismissal. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, states that they concur with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02998

    Original file (BC 2014 02998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02998 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment (RE) Code of “2G” (Fraudulent Entry into Military Service, Drug Abuse) be changed to allow him to reenlist in the military. We note that AFPC/DPSOA has determined that the RE code of 2G was issued to the applicant in error and will correct his records to reflect that his RE code is 2C. THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00007

    Original file (BC-2013-00007.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 Apr 12, the discharge authority approved the separation, and the applicant was discharged with an entry-level separation by reason of fraudulent entry into military service. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 31 Mar 13, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. The RE code which was issued at...