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.