Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04926
Original file (BC-2011-04926.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04926 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her honorable discharge for pregnancy or childbirth be changed 
to a disability retirement. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was under a medical doctor’s care. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of a VA 
Form 3288, Request for and Consent to Release of Information 
from an Individual’s Records. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty, she enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force (RegAF) on 18 Nov 98 and served on active duty until she 
was released from active duty on 12 Jul 02 with an Honorable 
characterization of service and a narrative reason for 
separation of “Pregnancy or Childbirth.” 

 

In accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen, women may find pregnancy and the expectation of 
motherhood incompatible with continued military service. If so, 
they may ask for separation. If they are separated, they are 
entitled to maternity care only in a military medical facility 
on a space available basis. 

 

Under AFI 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards, neither 
pregnancy nor childbirth is listed as disqualifying medical 
condition. The military Disability Evaluation System (DES), 
established under Title 10, United States Code (USC), to 
maintain a fit and vital fighting force, can only offer 


compensation for those service incurred diseases or injuries 
which specifically rendered a member unfit for continued active 
service and were the cause for career termination. The mere 
presence of a medical condition does not qualify a member for 
military disability evaluation and compensation. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has not 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 applicant 
contends she should be furnished a disability retirement in lieu 
of her administrative discharge for pregnancy or childbirth. 
However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and 
the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of an 
error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. 
Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the 
applicant’s voluntary discharge was consistent with the 
substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and within 
the commander's discretionary authority. Other than her own 
uncorroborated assertions, she has provided no evidence 
whatsoever that would lead us to believe that she suffered from 
an unfitting condition that should have resulted in her referral 
into the military Disability Evaluation System (DES). 
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 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-2011-04926 in Executive Session on 27 Sep 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Nov 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Chair 

 

 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04897

    Original file (BC-2011-04897.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04897 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed from “Pregnancy or Childbirth” to “Medical Retirement.” ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was discharged because of her pregnancy; however her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04094

    Original file (BC-2010-04094.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04094 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation “Pregnancy or Childbirth” be changed to a medical discharge. On 20 Oct 11, in a corrected advisory, DPSOS further clarified their evaluation and stated since the applicant was not able to complete her service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02194

    Original file (BC-2005-02194.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of her separation she had been disqualified from Air Traffic Control duties and had been continued on active duty awaiting waivers and Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) processing. With regard to the presence of medical conditions that were potentially disqualifying for controller duties, the Medical Consultant states the fact that she decided to voluntarily separate under pregnancy provisions rather than remain on active duty and complete the planned evaluations and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03216

    Original file (BC-2004-03216.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-02638

    Original file (BC-2011-02638.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the Air Force on 10 Jun 98 and served on active duty until her Honorable Discharge on 9 Oct 06. 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: The AFBCMR Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04658

    Original file (BC-2011-04658.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04658 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her honorable discharge for a personality disorder be changed to a medical retirement. On 14 Apr 98, the case file was found legally sufficient and the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03392

    Original file (BC-2003-03392.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to the circumstances of her case, she should have been discharged under a hardship reason, not pregnancy or childbirth. 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. A complete copy of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04402

    Original file (BC-2012-04402.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04402 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 32 days of advance leave she was charged while on leave in in Shreveport, LA be restored. The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04033

    Original file (BC-2011-04033.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has received disability compensation from the DVA for plantar fasciitis. Therefore, members may receive a compensation rating from the DVA for service-connected medical conditions that were not unfitting for service at the time of release from the military. The complete BCMR Medical evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1997 | BC 1997 03327

    Original file (BC 1997 03327.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, there was no indication of a mental condition at the time of her separation that warranted consideration through the disability evaluation system (DES). The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) makes the decision as to whether a member is to be processed through the DES, or when the member is determined medically disqualified for continued military service. In response, the applicant’s counsel provided additional medical documentation for review by the Board (Exhibit F).