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. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was granted a “Hardship” discharge in 1984. She recently registered at her local Department of Veterans Affairs hospital and was advised that she would automatically qualify for medical care when her DD Form 214 was corrected to reflect “Hardship”. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 13 Sep 82. On 23 Feb 84, the applicant requested to separate on 18 Jun 84 in accordance with AFR 39-10, Separation Upon Expiration of Term of Service, for Convenience of Government, Minority, Dependency and Hardship, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-17. The reason listed for this request was based on pregnancy with a due date of 31 Jul 84. On 24 Feb 84, the applicant’s commander recommended approval. On 14 Mar 84, the Chief, Personnel Division approved the applicant’s request to separate based on pregnancy. On 18 Jun 84, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 9 months, and 6 days of active service. Her DD Form 214 reflects “Pregnancy” as her 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 attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant applied and was approved to separate based on being pregnant and her DD Form 214 reflects that fact in the narrative reason for separation. Her discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The applicant provided no facts warranting a change to 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 22 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2014-00690 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 3 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 14.