RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02507 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to reflect he was retained on active 
duty for the purposes of Medical Continuation (MEDCON) during 
the period 17 May 10 through 30 Aug 10. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was unjustly denied Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders 
during the period in question. While he was serving an active 
duty tour of greater than 31 days, he fell and injured his 
shoulder. The injury (torn labrum) was determined by an 
Informal Line of Duty determination to be “In the Line of Duty 
(LOD),” and ultimately required surgery. The surgery was not 
elective. Based upon the promise of MEDCON orders starting 17 
May 10 prior to his 24 May 10 surgery, he voluntarily terminated 
his active duty orders on 16 May 10. When the MEDCON orders did 
not arrive prior to surgery, he attempted to postpone the 
surgery, but was ordered to have the surgery as scheduled. He 
did not receive his MEDCON orders until 10 Aug, 11 weeks after 
the surgery, during which time he was not able to return to his 
civilian job, and his family went without a paycheck, resulting 
in a financial hardship. 

 

It normally takes five to six months to fully recover from the 
type of surgery he had. After six weeks with no income, the 
flight surgeon authorized him to participate in “light duty” at 
Dover AFB only (near his home). However, based upon the 
doctor’s note authorizing “light duty,” his MEDCON orders were 
limited to only 38 days. He is aware of another individual who 
underwent the same surgery and received six months of MEDCON 
orders. 

 

During his recovery period, he followed the local policies for 
service members on MEDCON orders, even though he had not 
received them. He eventually filed a complaint with the Air 
Force Reserve Command Inspector General (AFRC/IG) against the 
two medical personnel primarily involved in handling of his LOD 
determination and MEDCON orders. 

 


In support of his request, the applicant provides an expanded 
statement and copies of excerpts from his service and civilian 
medical records, excerpts from AFI 36-3212 and AFRCI 36-3004, 
and his Point Credit Accounting Summary (PCARS) report. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 4 Feb 09, while on active duty orders, the applicant fell and 
injured his shoulder. He was treated at the base medical 
facility, and completed his tour. He completed ensuing tours 
from 16 Mar 09 to 19 Mar 09, and 15 Jan 10 to 16 May 10. 

 

On 2 Nov 09, an MRI revealed a torn labrum in his shoulder. 

 

On 14 Jan 10, his civilian physician recommended surgery in a 
letter addressed to the flight surgeon. The surgery was 
subsequently scheduled for 24 May 10. 

 

On 24 May 10, his civilian physician accomplished his shoulder 
surgery. 

 

On 24 Jun 10, the applicant filed a complaint with the Air Force 
Reserve Command Inspector General (AFRC/IG) alleging that 
medical personnel did not complete his LOD Determination in a 
timely manner and that he was improperly denied MEDCON orders 
following his shoulder surgery. 

 

On 30 Jun 10, six weeks after surgery, the Flight Surgeon 
authorized him “Light Duty” at Dover AFB, near his home. 

 

On 1 Jul 10, an Informal LOD determination found his injury to 
be “In the Line of Duty.” 

 

On 30 Jul 10, the applicant was ordered to active duty for the 
purpose of MEDCON for 38 days, beginning retroactively on the 
date of his surgery on 24 May 10. 

 

On 18 Aug 10, the applicant was placed on limited duty with 
mobility restrictions. 

 

On 27 Sep 10, HQ AFRC/IGQI responded to the applicant, stating 
in part that “these allegations fall outside the scope of the 
Inspector General Complaints Resolution Program.” However, 
after conferring with AFRC/SG, AFRC/IGQI acknowledged that his 
requests for his MEDCON orders were forwarded to AMC/A1RM on 
16 Jul 10, and “evidence indicates they were not acted upon.” 

 

On 11 Oct 11, the applicant filed a complaint with the AFRC/IG 
alleging that he was the victim of reprisal by the two primary 
medical personnel associated with his case. 


On 26 Oct 11, AFRC/IG notified the applicant that they had not 
found evidence of reprisal. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFMOA/SGHI recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. The applicant was injured on 4 Feb 09 
while on Title 10 Active Duty orders. Treatment was received 
and the applicant returned to duty without further known 
complications, completing his current tour. The medical 
provider recommended surgery at that time and the applicant 
indicated, per provider note, he would “think all this over and 
talk to military individuals and then get back to us regarding 
scheduling this electively.” 

 

A request for MEDCON orders was submitted on 10 May 10 for 
surgery scheduled for 24 May 10, and was allocated on 30 Jul 10 
with a start date of 24 May 10, the date of the surgery. IAW 
guidance provided in SAF/AA memo, dated 8 Dec 06, the surgical 
date is the day the member was rendered unable to perform his 
duties. 

 

The applicant was denied a MEDCON extension on 30 Jul 10, but 
was recommended to apply for Incapacitation Pay based on the 
guidance in DoDD 1241.1, dated 28 Feb 04, Reserve Component 
Medical Care and Incapacitation Pay for Line of Duty. This 
guidance defines Military Duties as “The duties of a Service 
member’s office and grade, and not necessarily the specialty or 
skill qualification held by the member prior to incurring or 
aggravating an injury, illness, or disease in the line of duty,” 
and the policy states “The Military Department shall provide pay 
and allowances to a member who is fit to perform military 
duties, but experiences a loss of earned income because of an 
injury, illness, or disease incurred or aggravated in the line 
of duty.” 

 

The complete AFMOA/SGHI 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 10 Jan 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. The 
applicant contends he should have remained on active duty on 
medical continuation orders until his medical condition was 
resolved. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and 
the applicant’s complete submission, we believe he has raised 
sufficient doubt as to whether he should have been released from 
active duty. In this respect, we note the applicant was 
injured in the line of duty (LOD) while on orders for 31 days or 
more and a request for medical continuation orders was 
apparently initiated prior to his scheduled release from active 
duty. However, through no fault of his own, it appears the 
request was not acted upon and the applicant was released from 
active duty just days prior to undergoing surgery related to the 
noted LOD injury. While we note the comments of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility (OPR) indicating the 
applicant’s injury did not necessarily render him unfit as his 
inability to perform the duties of his specialty or skill 
qualification did not necessarily constitute unfitness, we 
believe the fact the applicant’s injury, which required surgery 
and a subsequent recovery period, more than likely rendered him 
unfit during the period requested, regardless of his ability to 
convince his leadership to allow him to perform a period of 
active duty (with limitations) during his recovery period. 
Therefore, we believe it appropriate to resolve any doubt in the 
applicant’s favor and recommend his records be corrected as 
indicated below. 

 

4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 
17 May 10, he was not released from active duty, but on that 
date he was continued on active duty for the purpose of medical 
continuation until 30 August 10. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02507 in Executive Session on 15 May 12, 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 29 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFMOA/SGHI, dated 9 Jan 12, w/atchs. 

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair