Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02437
Original file (BC 2014 02437.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02437

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to “Pregnancy Hardship” or “Hardship.”


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When she was discharged she was told her discharge was for pregnancy/hardship, but her DD Form 214 only states “pregnancy.”

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 14 Nov 91.

On 14 Jan 93, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, with a narrative reason for separation of “pregnancy,” and was credited with one year, three months, and one day of active service.   

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


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Some individuals are separated for “pregnancy and childbirth,” and others are separated under the category of “hardship.”  There is no separation category termed a “pregnancy hardship.”  Applicants requesting separation for pregnancy are required to submit an AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial Report, confirming the pregnancy.  The form must be signed by the designating profiling officer, immediate commander, and the designated separation authority for final approval of the requested separation date.  In the alternative, in 1993 applicants requesting separation based on dependency or hardship had to comply with the guidance in AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, and submit a thorough explanation as to the circumstances causing the hardship along with extensive supporting documentation.  In most cases Red Cross verification was necessary to accompany the application.  

There is insufficient evidence contained in the applicant’s military record to confirm the circumstances surrounding her discharge.  Absent any documentation, the presumption of regularity of governmental affairs takes precedent, the application of which would result in the applicant’s record being correct.  The applicant provided no evidence of an error or an injustice which would warrant changing her narrative reason for separation. 

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 25 Aug 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02437 in Executive Session on 19 Mar 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 14, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 29 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 15.

						

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02597

    Original file (BC 2014 02597.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02597 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed to “Hardship” rather than “Pregnancy.” APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She elected to separate based on hardship due to domestic violence and not her pregnancy. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01382

    Original file (BC 2014 01382.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her date of separation (DOS) for discharge be changed to 3 Jun 86. Her narrative reason for separation be changed to “Expiration Term of Service.” APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was pregnant at the time of her discharge, but did not request an early discharge for pregnancy. The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider her untimely application because she was receiving Veterans Affairs (VA) medical benefits and care up until 10 Aug 12, when she was rated ineligible for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02287

    Original file (BC 2014 02287.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records show the applicant submitted a voluntary separation application for a separation of 2 Feb 09 based on pregnancy. The applicant contend she completed her punishment; however, she separated on 2 Feb 09 so she clearly did not complete her suspended punishment. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00690

    Original file (BC 2014 00690.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00690 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect “Hardship” as the narrative reason for separation. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02702

    Original file (BC 2014 02702.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s record documents her commander notified her he was recommending her for discharge for “Entry Level Performance or Conduct” - failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program (not for pregnancy, as the applicant contends) on 17 Aug 90 and that the applicant acknowledged receipt of this notification by placing her signature on the memorandum which is also dated 17 Aug 90. Additionally, there is documentation in the record to show that the base separations...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02747

    Original file (BC 2014 02747.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02747 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Block 28 – Narrative Reason for Separation, be corrected to reflect “Hardship”. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03613

    Original file (BC 2014 03613.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. It has been approximately 11 years since the applicant separated from the Air Force and the applicant did not address the aspects of her separation within 3 years of discharge. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02663

    Original file (BC 2014 02663.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02663 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to Honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the separation code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04363

    Original file (BC-2012-04363.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04363 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her separation code, narrative reason for discharge, and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2” be changed to allow her full entitlement to military benefits. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01120

    Original file (BC-2013-01120.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested to separate for “Pregnancy” and has provided no facts warranting a change to her narrative reason for separation. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in establishing the narrative reason of her separation as “Pregnancy.” Based on the evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s separation for “Pregnancy” was consistent with the substantive...