RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00007
		        COUNSEL:  NONE
		        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His narrative reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry into 
Military Service) and corresponding separation code (JDA), be 
changed.

2.  His Reentry (RE) code of 2C which denotes (Involuntarily 
separated with an entry level separation without 
characterization of service) be changed to a code that will 
allow him to serve again in the military.

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his first week of Basic Military Training (BMT), he had 
his first Physical Training (PT) evaluation and afterwards he 
noticed soreness in his abdominal muscles.

He was asked if he ever had stomach problems in the past.  He 
stated that he had surgery when he was sixteen and was told to 
watch for issues with scar tissue forming in the abdomen.  He 
has since been advised that he did not disclose this information 
to the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) and that he 
committed a fraudulent enlistment.  

He gave the MEPS all of his medical records and there is no 
mention of scar tissue in his abdomen.  His civilian hospital 
faxed his records directly to the medical officer.  He was 
advised that even though the MEPS had his records, he still had 
to apply for a waiver to return to training, which he did, and 
his waiver was denied.  

The RE code is preventing him from getting back in the service.  

He was told he could reenlist if he provided medical paperwork 
or a doctor’s opinion that he was medically fine.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 Jan 12, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
for a period of six years.

On 13 Apr 12, the applicant was notified by his squadron 
commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air 
Force for “Erroneous Enlistment.”  The reason for the proposed 
action was his commander received a medical narrative summary, 
dated 29 Mar 12, which found the applicant did not meet minimum 
medical standards to enlist due to chronic abdominal pain that 
existed prior to entering military service.  The applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge.  He 
waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and to submit 
statements in his own behalf.  

The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally 
sufficient to support the separation.  

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.  

He served three months and five days of active duty.
________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of a change in the applicant’s 
narrative reason for separation and separation code.  DPSOS 
states the applicant’s service characterization is correct as 
reflected on his DD Form 214.  DPSOR states that the applicant 
should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of 
chronic abdominal pain.  Had the Air Force known of this 
condition at the time of the applicant’s enlistment, he would 
not have been allowed entry into the military.  Airmen are given 
entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization 
when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous 
active service.  The Department of Defense (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 service 
is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force 
instructions.

DPSOR states that 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.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or 
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge 
processing.

DPSOR further states that although the applicant is apparently 
succeeding and coping well in his civilian capacity, it does not 
change the basis for which he was discharged from the Air Force.  
The military environment is unique and stressors encountered in 
such an environment may not appear or surface when removed from 
the military environment.

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to 
change his RE code to one that would allow him to reenlist.  
DPSOA states the applicant’s RE code (2C) is correct based on 
his involuntary entry level separation with uncharacterized 
service.  The applicant has not provided any evidence of an 
error or injustice in reference to his RE code.

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.  To 
date, a response has not been received (Exhibit E).

________________________________________________________________


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 concerning the 
applicant’s RE code.  The applicant has provided no evidence 
showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the 
prevailing instruction.  The RE code which was issued at the 
time of the applicant’s separation accurately reflects the 
circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code to 
be in error or unjust.  We, therefore, conclude that no basis 
exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request.  
We note that AFPC/DPSOR initially recommended denial of the 
applicant’s request to change his narrative reason for 
separation and separation code.  However, upon further review 
DPSOR has indicated that the applicant’s DD Form 214 is in error 
and incorrectly reflects the circumstances surrounding his 
separation.  As such, they will administratively correct his DD 
Form 214 to reflect the appropriate narrative reason for 
separation of “Erroneous Entry (Other)” with the corresponding 
separation code of JFC.  Therefore, aside from the above 
mentioned administrative correction, we find no basis to 
recommend further relief in this case.  

________________________________________________________________


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-
2013-00007 in Executive Session on 26 Sep 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 12, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Feb 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Mar 13.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 31 Mar 13.



                                   
                                   Panel Chair