RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03392
INDEX CODE: 110,00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her separation code and narrative reason for her discharge be changed
to hardship.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Due to the circumstances of her case, she should have been discharged
under a hardship reason, not pregnancy or childbirth. She was granted
permission to separate not because she was pregnant, but because her
family and she were experiencing a hardship due to her unborn
daughter’s physical abnormalities, her potential problems/needs at
birth, and the impossibility of a joint spouse assignment for her
husband and her. He was in North Carolina and she was in Maryland.
While her separation request was being reviewed, a stop loss was in
effect, which meant no one was able to separate under any
circumstance, especially not pregnancy. Therefore, her case was
special. She was experiencing a hardship. She would not have needed
letters to support her case had she been able to separate under just
pregnancy. Even though she requested a separation under
pregnancy/childbirth reasons, she did so because she wasn’t well
informed and, at the time, she was not in the state of mind to look
into the matter.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of a letter
submitted with separation package, a letter from the commander of the
Naval Medical Center, highly recommending an immediate separation, a
letter from the command chaplain at the Marine Corps Air Station
Cherry Point, recommending applicant be expeditiously discharged, and
two copies of her DD Form 214. Applicant's complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 April 2000. She was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class on 26
February 2001.
On 13 November 2001, the Commander of the National Naval Medical
Center highly recommended an immediate separation under AFI 36-3208,
Section B, paragraph 3.17 for the applicant. On 14 November 2001, the
applicant submitted a letter requesting immediate separation for
pregnancy. On 16 November 2001, the applicant’s husband’s (a Lance
Corporal in the Marines, assigned to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry
Point, Cherry Point, NC) Command Chaplain strongly recommended that
applicant be expeditiously discharged.
On 6 December 2001, the applicant’s Stop Loss Waiver request was
approved and she was released from Stop Loss.
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was
discharged from the Air Force on 31 December 2001 under the provisions
of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (pregnancy or
childbirth), with an honorable discharge. She served one year, eight
months and five days of active duty. A reenlistment eligibility (RE)
of 3C (first term airman not yet considered under the selective
reenlistment program (SRP) was assigned.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRSP states that they believe the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation. Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of
the discharge authority. Therefore, they recommend denial of
applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 5 December 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After reviewing the evidence of
record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error
or that she has been the victim of an injustice. Her contentions are
noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments provided by the
appropriate Air Force offices adequately address those allegations.
Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the 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 compelling 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 this application in
Executive Session on 29 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Panel Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Nov 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 24 Nov 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Dec 03.
CAROLYN J. WATKINS-TAYLOR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02741
She was honorably discharged on 22 Oct 02. The DVA awards MGIB benefits to service members who receive an honorable discharge and serve on active duty for three continuous years. An honorable reduction for one of the following reasons may result in a reduction of the required length of active duty: (1) convenience of the government; (2) disability; (3) hardship; (4) a medical condition existing before service (5) force reductions; or (6) physical or mental conditions which prevent...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03630
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03630 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized discharge be changed to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRSP states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03202
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03202 INDEX CODE: A67.70 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 9 Sep 88, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct – Drug Abuse) and furnished a general discharge. As of this date, no response has...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02916
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 6 Mar 02. The consultant states that a lab slip dated 27 Mar 02 is in her medical records indicating a positive pregnancy test. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03216
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS asserts that, based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority. As the applicant presents no facts warranting a change to her SPD code, denial is recommended. On 3 Feb 03, she requested discharge from active duty due to pregnancy and separated on 1 May 03...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00078
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00078 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 JUL 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item 15a, “Member contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03839
According to her separation document, she was discharged on 31 October 2003 for “pregnancy or childbirth.” ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states the applicant’s voluntary request for separation is not on file in the master personnel records; however, based on available documentation, it appears the applicant voluntarily submitted an application for separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01569
The applicant’s superior duty performance is significant and indicates that his personality traits leading to the diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder did not impact his duty performance. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service,” is correct. A complete copy of their evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00235
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00235 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code be changed from MDF Pregnancy or Childbirth to hardship. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends correction of the applicants separation code. Therefore, we recommend that the records be...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03426
In this respect, we note that the governing instruction in effect at the time of the applicant’s discharge provided that members applying for pregnancy separation had the option to elect to be released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve or to be discharged. The applicant has not provided any evidence to show that she requested a release from active duty and transfer to the Air Force Reserve. ___________________________________________________________________ The...