RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2021-01353

xxxxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

She receive a medical separation.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

She was diagnosed with anemia and discharged at basic military training (BMT).  Months later, when she became pregnant she was diagnosed with chronic fatigue due to anemia.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve (AFR) senior airman (E-4).

On 26 Sep 02, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of airman first class (E-3) after serving 11 months and 16 days of active duty.  She was discharged, with a narrative reason for separation of “Pregnancy or Childbirth.”

On 29 Jun 06, the applicant request a separation from the XXXXXXXX Air National Guard (ANG) for own convenience.  The separation request was approved and the applicant was honorably discharged on 8 Jul 06 and transferred to the AFR.

Dated 11 Aug 09, Reserve Order XXXXXXX, indicates the applicant was honorably discharged from the AFR effective 8 Aug 09.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The AFBCMR Medical Advisor recommends denying the application, finding insufficient evidence was presented to indicate that that applicant was diagnosed with any conditions during her military service that individually or collectively precluded her from reasonably performing the duties of her office, grade, rank, or rating.  Specifically, there was insufficient evidence that the applicant’s medical conditions were so severe as to result in a medical discharge, as she had claimed.  The responsibility for providing sufficient evidence to support an appeal rests with the applicant.  In this case, the totality of the record demonstrated that the applicant was appropriately discharged per AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 3.17 for reason of pregnancy.  There was no evidence that the applicant had suffered from anemia during BMT, or that she had acquired any medical condition that was potentially unfitting for continued military service.  In order for an individual to be separated for medical reasons, there must first be a medical condition that is disqualifying for military service, in accordance with the AFI 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards.  Such a condition would have to demonstrate a failure of improvement or resolution after optimum medical treatment, or would have to require duty and/or mobility restrictions for 365 days or more, as would be depicted on an AF Form 469, Duty Limitation Report, or legacy AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial Report.  The applicant’s Service Treatment Record contained no evidence of such conditions.  In determining unfitness, whether under the defunct DoDI 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, 14 Nov 96, which would have been in effect at the time of the applicant’s military service, or its contemporary, DoDI 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System, 5 Aug 14, there are a number of additional factors to consider. Common to both policies, “A Service member shall be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that the member, due to physical disability, is unable to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating (hereafter called duties) to include duties during a remaining period of Reserve obligation.  Additionally, under both DoDI 1332.38 and DoDI 1332.18, “A Service member may also be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that: (1) The Service member’s disability represents a decided medical risk to the health of the member or to the welfare or safety of other members; or (2) The Service member’s disability imposes unreasonable requirements on the military to maintain or protect the Service member.”  With respect to evidentiary standard for determining unfitness because of disability, under both DoDI 1332.38 and the new DoDI 1332.18, “The Secretary of the Military Department concerned must cite objective evidence in the record, as distinguished from personal opinion, speculation, or conjecture, to determine a Service member is unfit because of disability.” Additionally, “With the exception of presumption of fitness cases, the Secretary of the Military Department concerned will determine fitness or unfitness for military service on the basis of the preponderance of the objective evidence in the record. [Emphasis added.]”

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 20 Sep 21 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Advisor and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years of discovering the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2021-01353 in Executive Session on 23 Nov 21:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 1 Jan 21.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFBCMR Medical Advisor, dated 20 Sep 21.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 20 Sep 21.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.