RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	  DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05831
		  	  COUNSEL:  NONE
   	  	          HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation of “Discharge Fraudulent 
Entry Into Military Service” be changed to “Erroneous 
Enlistment.” 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has not taken the disqualifying medications on record since 
he was 8 years old and the medications were only taken for 
several months.  After 12 years, he did not remember the 
medications he had taken.

The reason for discharge should be changed from fraudulent 
enlistment to erroneous enlistment due to how early in life he 
was prescribed the medications.   

In support of his request, the applicant provides extract copies 
from his medical records.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 Mar 13, the applicant entered active duty.

On 21 Jun 13, the applicant’s commander notified him of his 
decision to recommend his discharge from the Air Force In 
Accordance With (IAW) Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, 
Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5C, 
Defective Enlistments, for fraudulent enlistment.  The specific 
reason for this action was a history of mental health treatment 
that was not documented on his DD Form 2807-1 and DD Form 2807-
2, Report of Medical Examination.  Had the Air Force known this 
information, it could have rendered him ineligible to enlist in 
the Air Force.  

On 26 Jun 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification, consulted counsel and submitted statements in his 
own behalf.

On 1 Jul 13, the staff judge advocate found the discharge 
recommendation legally sufficient.  

On 1 Jul 13, the discharge authority approved the 
recommendation.

On 3 Jul 13, he received an entry level separation with an 
uncharacterized character of service.  His narrative reason for 
separation is “Discharge Fraudulent Entry Into Military 
Service.”

On 28 Apr 14, SAF/MRBR provided the applicant with an 
opportunity to provide post-service information (Exhibit G).  In 
response, the applicant submitted a Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) report, dated 4 Aug 14, which shows the 
applicant has no prior arrest data at the FBI (Exhibit H).
  
________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on file 
in the applicant’s records, SGPS finds the separation was done 
IAW established policy and administrative procedures.  His 
diagnoses regardless when made is disqualifying for military 
service.  Medical waivers will be denied.  A review of the 
records provided and medical notes from Wilford Hall Medical 
Center (WHMC) show he was diagnosed with the condition at age 
10-11 and he states he was only treated with medications for a 
few months.  This was not disclosed at the Military Entrance 
Processing Station (MEPS) because he felt the potential for 
disqualification was too high.  On 29 May 13, he was seen in the 
Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) where the diagnoses of bipolar 
was made.  Based on his diagnoses he subsequently was processed 
for an entry level separation.

The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.  

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on 
file in the master personnel records, the discharge was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority.  On 17 and 24 Jun 13, the applicant 
completed and signed statements admitting to the fact that he 
failed to disclose medications he was previously prescribed 
prior to entering the military for an apparent mental health 
condition (bipolar disorder).  These admissions show a pre-
existing condition that the applicant failed to disclose prior 
to entering the military.  Therefore, DPSOR concurs that the 
fraudulent enlistment was the correct basis for the discharge.   
Further, airman are given entry level separation/uncharacterized 
service characterization when separation is initiated in the 
first 180 days of continuous active service.  The DOD determined 
if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, 
it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize 
their limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character 
of service is correct and IAW Department of Defense (DOD) and 
Air Force instructions.  The applicant did not submit any 
evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the discharge 
processing.  

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He has made statements that do not help his position.  While 
speaking to the counselor at the BAS, he stated an incorrect age 
range and the reason for not disclosing the disqualifying 
factors that led to his separation.  When he realized the error, 
he had already attended his final BAS appointment and it was too 
late to correct his initial statements.

His recruiter had advised him to keep quiet as it was early in 
his life that he had been prescribed the medications and because 
of the length of time between when he was prescribed the 
medications and his enlistment.  As for his statements regarding 
a possible bipolar diagnosis, it was nothing more than an 
assumption on his part.  

He had typed up a detailed rebuttal to his discharge 
recommendation but his Area Defense Counsel (ADC) convinced him 
to submit a vague version that he now sees was meant to make him 
look guilty rather than aid in his defense. 

The reason he was on the disqualifying medications for such a 
short time and has never taken anything similar since 2001 is 
that he never had the conditions that required the medications.  
As for the signed statements admitting that he had not disclosed 
the information, the context of the charge implies that he had 
full knowledge and admitted to withholding information.  To 
this, he requests that his age when prescribed the medications 
be taken into account and the probability of not knowing the 
names or the intended treatment of the medications.  

He never needed any of the disqualifying medications and was 
only taking each for a span of months before being taken off 
them.  He is not, nor has ever been bipolar.  He lacked 
disciplinary structure which led to his childhood behavioral 
problems.  His mother is bipolar and she did not know how to 
deal with his behavioral issues.

He wants to serve in the military in any position he can and 
asks to be given that chance.  He wants to be a part of 
something larger than himself and wants to do something for his 
country that genuinely matters.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

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.  While the 
applicant's assertions in response to the Air Force evaluations 
are noted, he has not provided substantial evidence which, in 
our opinion, successfully refutes the assessment of his case by 
the Air Force Offices of Primary Responsibility (OPR).   
Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the 
AF OPRs and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our 
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of 
proof of either an error or an injustice.  In the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
any of 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-
2013-05831 in Executive Session 9 Oct 14, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-2603:

     , Panel Chair
     , Member
     , Member


 
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2013-05831 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 18 and 30 Dec 13, w/atch. 
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 27 Jan 14.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 31 Jan 14.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Feb 14.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant,undated.
     Exhibit G.  Information Bulletin, w/atch.
     Exhibit H.  FBI report, dated 4 Aug 14.