Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01760
Original file (BC-2013-01760.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01760
			COUNSEL:  NONE
    			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation “Defective enlistment-
fraudulent entry” be changed. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is currently a 50 percent service connected disabled veteran 
and his injury occurred while on active duty and not prior to 
service.  He did not enter the Air Force fraudulently.

The applicant’s submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 Aug 1991, the applicant entered active duty.

On 26 Sep 1991, he was notified by his commander that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for “Concealment 
of Other Bars to Enlistment-Medical Conditions” in accordance 
with Air Force Regulation 39-10, Administrative Separation of 
Airman.  The specific reason for this action was a medical 
narrative summary, dated 18 Sep 1991, which found the applicant 
had chronic low back pain secondary to an old compression 
fracture that he did not disclose on his SF Form 93, Report of 
Medical History, at time of enlistment.      

On 26 Sep 1991, the applicant acknowledged the notification and 
was advised of his right to consult counsel and submit 
statements in his own behalf. 

On 27 Sep 1991, the assistant staff judge advocate found the 
discharge legally sufficient.   

On 1 Oct 1991, he received an entry-level separation and a 
narrative reason for separation of “Defective-enlistment 
fraudulent entry.”

He served two months and five days.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. The documentation in the 
applicant’s master personnel records supports the basis for the 
discharge and the applicant’s entry level service 
characterization.  The applicant failed to indicate on his SF 
Form 93 that he had a history of recurrent back pain.  Based 
upon the applicant’s failure to disclose his prior service 
medical condition, his commander recommended his discharge from 
the Air Force for fraudulent entry with an entry level 
separation.   The applicant did not submit any evidence or 
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge 
processing.  

The complete 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 21 Jun 2013 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 timely file.    

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 Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
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 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-01760 in Executive Session on 30 Jan 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Apr 2013.
Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 5 Jun 2013.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 2013.




					  						
			 Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02207

    Original file (BC 2013 02207.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The specific reason for the discharge recommendation was a pre-existing medical condition; the applicant had a history of chest pain and recurrent syncope which if revealed could have resulted in rejection of her enlistment. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She is not challenging her dismissal, only the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02476

    Original file (BC 2014 02476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 Dec 12, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation, directing the applicant be issued an entry-level separation with a basis for discharge of fraudulent entry. The applicant’s commander notified him on 5 Dec 12 he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for entry-level separation (Fraudulent Entry) for deliberately concealing a prior service medical condition. The following documentary evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05601

    Original file (BC 2013 05601.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05601 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry level separation be changed to a medical discharge with benefits. Her dependent medical records reflect that she had an allergy to "pecan" nuts. Nevertheless, since the applicant was presumed fit to enter military service [at least from a musculoskeletal perspective] and she was presumably...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05831

    Original file (BC 2013 05831.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00225

    Original file (BC-2013-00225.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00225 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation of “Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service (Medical)” be corrected. On 5 October 2012, the applicant was notified by her commander that he was recommending her for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03351

    Original file (BC-2012-03351.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based upon the physician’s findings, the applicant was notified by her commander of his intent to recommend her for an uncharacterized entry-level separation based on fraudulent entry, under the provisions of Air Force Program Directive 36-32 and Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 5.15 under Basis for Discharge for Fraudulent Enlistment. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge and directed the applicant be...

  • 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02031

    Original file (BC-2012-02031.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02031 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reason for separation (Fraudulent Entry in Military Service) and Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “JDA” be changed to reflect a medical discharge. On 27 Jun 11, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry- level separation, by...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0000598

    Original file (0000598.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement (undated), a letter from a lawyer; documentation associated with his administrative discharge, which included a SF Form 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 10 April 1998, and a Mental Health Evaluation, dated 23 Jul 98; and copies of letters of admission from two universities. The reason for the proposed action was that applicant failed to indicate on his SF 93 [Report of Medical History] that he had been diagnosed...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01900

    Original file (BC-2013-01900.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 discharge authority’s discretion. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the...