Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02068
Original file (BC 2013 02068.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02068
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He acquire retirement points during the Incapacitation Pay 
(INCAP Pay) period of 20 Oct 12 – 20 Apr 13.  

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In 2012, he reinjured his left Achilles tendon which was 
initially injured on 6 Nov 01.  In Nov 01, it was torn and 
repaired; then, in 2012, he reinjured it during official 
training and now requests retirement points.  

He was temporarily placed on INCAP Pay while waiting for his 
Line of Duty (LOD) paperwork to be completed and was supposed to 
have been placed on Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders as soon 
as the LOD was completed.  The LOD was held up at the group 
level for reasons he is unsure of; however, he was never 
switched over to MEDCON.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement; copies of an LOD, dated Mar 13; active duty orders 
for the periods, 17 – 19 Oct 12; 29 Apr 12 – 23 Sep 12; Initial 
LOD for the Nov 01 injury; AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition 
Report, dated 12 Feb 13, and various other supporting documents.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Based on available records, the applicant was a member of the 
New York Air National Guard (NYANG).  

On 29 Apr 12, the applicant was recalled to Extended Active Duty 
(EAD) under Title 32, USC § 502 (A).  On 13 Jul 12, the 
applicant reported to the Flight Medicine Clinic complaining of 
a painful and swollen Achilles tendon.  On 23 Sep 12, he was 
released from EAD.

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PS recommends denial, stating, in part, after reviewing 
the request they note the applicant has supplied sufficient 
documents associated with having a LOD and was restricted fr6m 
military duty. 

In accordance with the governing Department of Defense 
Instruction, a member authorized pay and allowances shall not be 
allowed to attend inactive duty training periods or to acquire 
retirement points for performing inactive duty training.  

There are two types of INCAP Pay; 

The first, a Reserve component member who is unable to perform 
military, due to an injury, illness, or disease incurred or 
aggravated in the line of duty is entitled to full pay and 
allowances, including all incentive and special pays to which 
entitled, if otherwise eligible, less any earned income as 
provided under 37 U.S.C.   

The second is where a member is able to perform military duties 
but demonstrates a loss of earned income as a result of an 
injury, illness, or disease incurred or aggravated in the line 
of duty.  In this instance, a member is entitled to pay and 
allowance but not to exceed the amount of the demonstrated loss 
of earned income.  This has been commonly referred to as INCAP 
Pay.

The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He has been on Temporary Duty (TDY) orders and has not had 
adequate time to prepare a response; however, he contacted the 
medical group and found out that key members of the medical 
group are TDY as well.  He cannot provide any other supporting 
documents in the time he has.  He requests that his medical 
group at his unit be contacted because they handled the bulk of 
his LOD and INCAP paperwork.  They will be the first to explain 
that the length of time it took to procure the finished copy of 
his LOD was unacceptable and of no fault of his own. 

The applicant reiterates his original contentions and states 
that he has been working hard toward his retirement and would 
like to get the active duty points he deserves.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.   We note that 
the applicant requests that his medical group be contacted for 
additional evidence; however, the Board is not an investigative 
body and the burden of proof in substantiating an error or 
injustice rests with the individual applicant.  Therefore, we 
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the 
basis for our conclusion the applicant has failed to sustain his 
burden that he has suffered an error or an injustice.  
Accordingly, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this 
application.

________________________________________________________________


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-02068 in Executive Session on 4 Mar 14 and 5 Mar 
14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Apr 13, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Record.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 17 Jun 13, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 13.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jul 13.




                                   Panel Chair



FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03094

    Original file (BC 2013 03094.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03094 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive retirement points for the period 27 Sep 10 through 1 Apr 12 rather than Incapacitation Pay (INCAP Pay). In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement; active duty orders for the period, 2 Jun – 26 Sep...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00118

    Original file (BC 2013 00118.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Medical Consultant states that the applicant may be eligible for at least periodic restoration of active duty orders to receive treatment for his medical condition on the dates he was required to take leave from his civilian employment, but finds the evidence insufficient to establish MEDCON orders along the entire continuum requested; noting the evidence suggesting that his medical condition waxed and waned while under treatment with epidural and sacroiliac steroid injections; allowing...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02900

    Original file (BC-2012-02900.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends denial of the applicant’s request for promotion to Master Sergeant, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. ANGI 36-2502, Promotion of Airman, states “Prior to promotion to any...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03639

    Original file (BC-2012-03639.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence of a Command Man-Day Allocation System (CMAS) request for MEDCON during any time the applicant was on AD orders or prior to his retirement date of 1 Jun 12. While we note the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility to deny the applicant’s request, the evidence reflects the applicant was treated for a medical condition in Dec 11 and, contrary to the AF Form 348, Informal Line of Duty Determination, dated Mar 12, wherein the military medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01410

    Original file (BC 2014 01410.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Upon returning from his AD deployment in 2012 he was denied Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders and pay by his medical group, and he should have been considered for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). On 12 Dec 12, the Connecticut IG rendered a determination that the applicant’s contested injury was incurred while serving on AD, and, as he was found “fit for duty,” no MEDCON orders were warranted. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 01103

    Original file (BC 2012 01103.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He receive military pay and Air National Guard (ANG) retirement points for the periods of time requested above. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit H. On 11 Mar 14, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration, reiterating that he sustained a shoulder injury while serving on active duty due to being electrocuted when...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05621

    Original file (BC 2013 05621.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His first LOD was informal; the second LOD was initiated to validate continuation on active duty; the LOD, prognosis and a plan of care must be submitted every 45 days; however, there was some confusion with the process, so his request for MEDCON was not submitted until his active duty orders had ended. The complete DPFA evaluation is at Exhibit C. NGB/SGPA recommends denial, noting a request for MEDCON orders requires medical documentation to support and validate a request. We note that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04418

    Original file (BC 2013 04418.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 29 Sep 12, according to AFPC/DPFA, the applicant submitted a request for MEDCON orders. The remaining 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/DPFA recommends denial of the applicant’s request for an orders extension or point credit, indicating the documentation submitted does not support his potential eligibility for MEDCON orders...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00776

    Original file (BC 2014 00776.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) recommended he be retired with 40 percent disability effective 27 Sep 13. According to an AF Form 1971, Application for Incapacitation Pay, dated 20 Jun 13, the applicant requested he be approved for INCAP Pay for the period of 21 Jun to 18 Dec 13. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was entitled to receive Incapacitation Pay for the period of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01298

    Original file (BC 2013 01298.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01298 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to show that he was not required to use his civilian annual and sick leave for an injury that occurred while serving in Inactive Duty for Training (IDT) status. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...