RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05361 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry level separation be changed to general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: A change in the type of separation would help him sustain a full-time job. During the time he was in technical school, his father left his mother causing him to have an emotional breakdown. He had three younger sisters at home and he was concerned for their safety because his mother was very abusive. In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provides a copy of a domestic violence order of protection, letters from the Law Office of Stiehl & Stiehl, and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 January 1986. The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10. The specific reason was on 17 April 1986 the applicant failed to make satisfactory progress in a required training program with a score of 66 percent. The instructor felt the applicant lacked confidence in himself and his abilities to be a jet mechanic. On 24 April 1986, the applicant failed the block III retest with a score of 62 percent. Due to his excessive failures, it was evident that he was unable to retain the technical information necessary to complete the course. He was academically eliminated on 1 May 1986. He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification. After consulting with counsel the applicant submitted a statement on his own behalf. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed discharge. The applicant was discharged on 14 May 1986 with an entry level separation. He served 4 months and 13 days on active duty. On 19 August 2013, a request for information pertaining to his post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). The applicant states he is married with five children. He has spent the majority of his career in the sales industry and is currently employed with the United States Postal Service. He regrets the decision he made 25 years ago while in the service. During that time he was not focused on his job due to turmoil at home. He did not realize how his decision would affect the rest of his life. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 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 error or injustice. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was given an entry level separation for entry level performance and conduct based on his failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program. Because he was within his first 180 days of active service, he was given an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. We find no evidence which would lead us to believe that his entry level separation with uncharacterized service was improper or contrary to the governing instruction under which it was affected. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of sufficient evidence to the contrary, we conclude that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing he has suffered either an error or an injustice. Accordingly, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2012-05361 in Executive Session on 12 September 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 November 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 August 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 August 2013, w/atchs.