RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-00149

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE INDICATED

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation, “Discharge Fraudulent Entry into Military Service,” be removed from his records so that he will be eligible to rejoin the Air Force.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was erroneously discharged for fraudulent enlistment since he honestly answered “yes” to the question on the Standard Form 86, Questionnaire For National Security Positions, which specified, “Have you had any prior arrest(s)”?  Also, he admitted to smoking marijuana in the past and received a waiver.  However, the forms he completed in Basic Military Training (BMT) were worded differently by asking if he had ever pleaded guilty to a first offender’s status.  He was involved in only one incident and was a first time offender; therefore, he answered “yes” to the question.  He was forthcoming with his recruiter and did not withhold any information; therefore, he questions whether or not he was properly recruited.  His unjustified discharge has affected his employment, financial situation, and the security of his family.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 7 May 13.  

On 26 Aug 13, the applicant provided a BMT Trainee/Airman Statement, indicating that in June 2001 he was charged with possession of marijuana.  He pled “yes” as a first offender, for which he received probation and paid a fine.  He further stated that he did disclose this information to his recruiter.  

On 26 Aug 13, the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) BMT Liaison initiated a DD Form 369, Police Record Check, requesting if the applicant had a police or juvenile record, to include minor traffic violations.  

On 27 Aug 13, the AFRC BMT Liaison was provided the applicant’s arrest/booking report from the Cobb County Sheriff’s Office, dated 14 Jan 01 and 15 Jun 01.  

On 3 Sep 13, the applicant provided a BMT Trainee/Airman Statement, reiterating his charge of marijuana possession and indicated that while on probation, he tested positive for marijuana.  However, he was able to continue his first offender program after completing his required probation obligations.  

On 9 Sep 13, an Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) Form 72A, Waiver/Determination Approval/Disapproval, was initiated for an after-the-fact waiver determination to be made regarding the  applicant’s continued service.

On 9 Sep 13, the applicant’s flight chief recommended disapproval, indicating the applicant’s continued service is not in the best interest of the Air Force Reserve.  

On 10 Sep 13, the applicant’s commander disapproved the applicant’s waiver.  

On 23 Sep 13, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for fraudulent entry.  Specifically, he has law violations that are disqualifying for military service.  Had the Air Force known, it could have rendered him ineligible to enlist.  

On 23 Sep 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his right to consult with counsel and to submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 24 Sep 13, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an Entry-Level Separation.  

On 26 Sep 13, the applicant was furnished an Entry-Level Separation with uncharacterized service, with a narrative reason for separation of “Discharge Fraudulent Entry into Military Service.”

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


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s 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 had multiple opportunities to reveal his police charges prior to going to BMT, but he chose not to do so.  During his initial interview with his recruiter, he was able to recall being charged and stopped for a traffic violation which led to the marijuana possession charge, but did not reveal the actual marijuana possession charge.  These statements are confirmed by the applicant’s recruiter that the applicant failed to fully disclose his arrest record prior to entering the military.  Therefore, we concur that fraudulent enlistment was the correct basis for his discharge.  Airman are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  Since the applicant had only been on active duty for 49 days at the time the discharge was initiated, he would receive an entry level separation.  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 separation code, narrative reason for separation, and uncharacterized service are correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force Instructions.  Furthermore, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the discharge processing.  

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 15 Sep 14 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 timely filed.  

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 of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

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-2014-00149 in Executive Session on 18 Nov 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated undated, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 24 Feb 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 14.

						

4