RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01674
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her narrative reason for separation and Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed from “Pregnancy” to “Medically Disqualified not for Cause.”
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was medically disqualified from her career field on 13 May 2002 and shortly thereafter she discovered she was pregnant.  She notified the separation’s office of her situation and her intent to separate.  She was told that her reenlistment bonus would not be recouped due to the fact that she was no longer technically qualified in her career field due to illness and that she should pursue a pregnancy discharge instead of a medical discharge.  She followed the advice given and separated on 1 September 2002, with an AFSC of 9A300 (medically disqualified not for cause).  Subsequent to her separation, she received notification that her reenlistment bonus was being recouped based upon her pregnancy separation code.

In support of her request, the applicant submits a personal statement, a statement from the NCOIC of relocations, copies of her waiver status report, her request for early separation and additional documents associated with the issues cited in her contentions.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted her initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 3 September 1997 for a period of four years.  On 3 November 2000, she reenlisted for a period of six years and accepted a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB).  The applicant was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), with an effective date and date of rank of 1 March 2002.  During her enlistment, she served as an Air Traffic Controller, with the Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) of 1C151.

On 30 May 2002, the applicant submitted a request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation, AF Form 31, due to her pregnancy, with a separation date of 1 September 2002.  Her commander recommended approval due to the applicant’s pending medical disqualification.  The applicant’s request was approved by the separation authority.

The applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Pregnancy), with an SPD code of KDF, on 1 September 2002.  She had completed a total of 4 years, 11 months and 29 days and was serving in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of discharge.  She received an RE Code of 1J, which defined means "Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation."
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant states that voluntary separations, including voluntary pregnancy separations, are subject to recoupment of the unearned portions of reenlistment bonuses.  On 14 March 2002, the applicant presented to her flight surgeon with complaints of depressed mood.  She was subsequently diagnosed with “minor depressive disorder” and was prescribed with antidepressant and assigned to duties not involving controlling.  On 27 June 2002, the applicant was disqualified from air traffic controller duty.  The BCMR Medical Consultant indicates that depressive disorders are disqualifying for Air Traffic Controller duty but not necessarily continued general military service.  In the applicant’s case, her mild depressive condition was not unfitting or disqualifying for continued general military service and did not require evaluation in the Air Force Disability Evaluation System.  Since the applicant’s condition showed an excellent response to treatment and she was a superior performer, she was a prime candidate for cross training and retention on active duty.  The applicant indicated that she did not want to cross-train into another career field and desired to separate instead.  Since the applicant initiated voluntary separation under the provisions for pregnancy, there was no action on assigning her to another career field for cross training.  The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRSP recommends the application be denied.  DPPRSP believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The applicant was briefed by the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) about cross training; however, she elected a pregnancy separation with the misunderstanding that her reenlistment money would not be recouped.  DPPRSP concurs with the BCMR Medical Consultant, in that the applicant would have probably been cross-trained and retained on active duty.  Since she elected to separate, there was no option to offer cross training.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE states that the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “1J” is correct.  No evidence was presented to support changing the RE code.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE states that the recoupment of a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) is based on the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code.  No evidence was provided to show this to be determined a medical disqualification discharge.  Based on HQ AFPC/DPPRSP’s recommendation of denial to change the SPD code, the SRB recoupment remains valid.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 6 February 2004 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit G).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After reviewing the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that relief is warranted.  Prior to the applicant’s pregnancy, she was having medical problems and was ultimately medically disqualified from her career field.  In support of the applicant’s appeal, the local Chief of Relocations and Employments provided a statement substantiating the applicant’s assertion of miscounseling.  Additionally, AFI 36-2606, paragraph 2.17.2, stipulates “SRB termination and recoupment is not appropriate when an airman is not technically qualified in the SRB skill because of injury, illness, or other impairment that didn’t result from misconduct.”  It is our opinion that, had the applicant not relied on erroneous information, she would have applied for separation in accordance with the cited Air Force instruction, which precludes recoupment action.  We, therefore, believe any doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant and that the applicant’s unearned portion of her SRB not be recouped.  In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that her narrative reason for separation, issued in conjunction with her Honorable Discharge on 1 September 2002, was “Conditions Not a Disability,” that she was issued a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “GFV” and that the unearned portion of her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) not be recouped.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 25 March 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01674.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 21 Oct 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 7 Nov 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 14 Nov 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 04.

                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-01674

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that her narrative reason for separation, issued in conjunction with her Honorable Discharge on 1 September 2002, was “Conditions Not a Disability,“ that she was issued a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “GFV” and that the unearned portion of her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) not be recouped.

                                     	Director
                                     	Air Force Review Boards Agency