RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05716 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation “Entry Level Performance or Conduct” be changed to “Physical Condition Not a Disability.” APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not properly discharged. In September 2010, he had a right knee injury and was placed on medical hold. Due to his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) “1T211 – Pararescue Helper” he was held back longer. While on medical hold he received news from home that his local fire department was hiring and he wanted to apply. This job opportunity played a big role in him wanting to be discharged. He further states he did not realize that his discharge would prevent him from serving his country again. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 June 2010. The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208. The specific reason was on 7 September 2010, the applicant self-eliminated from the Pararescue Indoctrination Course. As a result, he was removed from the course. He was advised of his rights in this matter and waived his right to consult with counsel and to submit a statement on his own behalf. In a legal review of the case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended separation. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged. The applicant was discharged on 3 December 2010 with an entry level separation. He served 5 months and 12 days on active duty. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states a review of the applicant's records shows that he requested removal from the course due to wanting to start a family and the stress of military training was too much for him and his family. The applicant did not want to be re-classified into another Air Force Specialty and discharge processing actions were taken in accordance with the governing directive. Therefore, the applicant's SPD code and narrative reason for separation are correct as indicated on the applicant's DD Form 214. The applicant's service characterization is also correct as reflected on his DD Form 214. Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days 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, the uncharacterized character of service listed on his DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the SPD code, character of service and narrative reason for separation were appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the processing of his discharge. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 September 2014 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the narrative reason for separation assigned was proper and in compliance with the appropriate instructions. In addition, the applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise. Therefore, we agree with 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. 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 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-2013-05716 in Executive Session on 7 October 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Although XXXXXXXXXX chaired the panel, in view of her unavailability, XXXXXXXXXX has agreed to sign as Acting Panel Chair. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 December 2013. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 17 January 2014. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 September 2014.