RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04402 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 32 days of advance leave she was charged while on leave in in Shreveport, LA be restored. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She should have been placed on convalescent leave due to complications with her pregnancy while she was on ordinary leave. Because these complications precluded her from flying, she was unable to return to her home station from ordinary leave and was instead reassigned via permanent change of station (PCS) to a base within the continental United States (CONUS). However, convalescent leave was never requested by her former or new unit of assignment. She was never put into in-patient or out-patient status and she continued to be charged leave even though she was following her doctor's orders. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _______________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Air Force on 25 May 10. On 25 Nov 12, the applicant separated from the Air Force, was issued an Honorable discharge certificate with a narrative reason for separation of “Pregnancy or childbirth,” and was credited with two years, six months, and one day of active service. The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant was approved for leave for the period 16 Apr 11 through 10 May 11. On or about 16 Apr, she departed Thule AB and took leave at her family’s residence in Shreveport, LA. The applicant visited the Barksdale AFB MTF on 3 May 11 and discovered she was having pregnancy complications. The MTF referred the applicant to an obstetrician in Shreveport, who discouraged her from traveling due to gestational age. On 13 May 11, the applicant received PCS orders for a short-notice assignment from Thule AB to JBSA-Randolph AFB, TX. On 24 May 11, the applicant’s supervisor directed her to provide a copy of the letter to the Barksdale MTF, and the MTF concurred with the civilian physician’s recommendation not to travel. The applicant arrived at JBSA-Randolph AFB on 24 Jun 11. In accordance with AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, unit commanders normally approve convalescent leave based on the written recommendation of the military physician most familiar with the member’s condition. AF Form 988, Part II (member’s copy) states “it is your responsibility to return to your permanent duty station or obtain a leave extension from your supervisor before the expiration date of your leave.” In addition, Air Force Manual 65-116, Volume 2, Defense Joint Military Pay System (DJMS) Unit Procedures Excluding FSO, states “Follow-up on open leave for members on leave awaiting submission of Part III must be accomplished with the member and/or supervisor by the Unit Leave Administrator.” The applicant and her chain of command failed to consult with the leave monitor at Thule AB to adjust her leave accordingly. There is no source document validating any follow-up action with the unit leave administrator after the applicant’s leave expired or endorsement by the unit commander approving convalescent leave base on the MTF’s recommendation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM 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 9 Nov 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case. While we note the comments of the Air Force office of primary responsibility indicating the applicant failed to coordinate with her leave monitor to ensure her leave was adjusted accordingly, the Board believes a preponderance of the evidence indicates that corrective action is warranted. In this respect, we note the applicant was complying with the direction of competent medical authority by not traveling during the period of time in question. Further, since the applicant immediately reported her medical condition and resultant travel restrictions to her unit’s leadership, we believe she took appropriate measures to ensure she was in the correct duty status. However, we find it reasonable to conclude that the apparent lack of coordination between her gaining and losing units of assignment and military and civilian healthcare providers precluded responsible authorities from making a reasoned determination regarding the applicant’s duty status, which we believe resulted in her predicament. Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected as indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that: a. She was not charged advance leave during the period 14 May 2011 through 14 June 2011, but during the period 14 May 2011 through 14 June 2011 she was placed on convalescence leave for a period of thirty two (32) days. b. On 24 November 2012, thirty-two (32) days of leave were added to her leave balance. c. She sold a total of 32 days of accrued leave in conjunction with her 25 November 2012 separation. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04402 in Executive Session on 4 Jun 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Jul 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 30 Oct 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Nov 12.