RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00805

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED: YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He be continued on Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders from 
1 November 2011 through 5 May 2012 and receive back pay and 
allowances for that timeframe.  

2.  His Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) Line of Duty (LOD), 
Service Aggravated determination be changed.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  He was mistakenly taken off active duty orders due to the 
extended amount of time it took to complete the Line of Duty 
(LOD) determination.  He had knee surgery on 8 September 2011.  
On 1 November 2011, a decision was made to release him from 
Title 10 active duty orders and place him on medical 
continuation (MEDCON) orders.  However, the MEDCON orders were 
not completed.  He was told that he had to wait for the LOD 
determination to be finalized prior to being placed on the 
MEDCON orders.  His LOD determination was completed on 
24 February 2012.  At that time, he was not placed on MEDCON 
orders but, was also not cleared to return to duty by his 
doctor.  He was told it was because he was no longer in physical 
therapy and was only doing home therapy and since he was not 
actively seeking medical care, he was fit to return to his 
civilian employment.  His duty restrictions at the time were no 
climbing, no lifting greater than 20 pounds, no twisting, and no 
running.  His military doctor cleared him to return to duty on 
5 May 2012.  

2.  The final LOD determination states that his injury existed 
prior to service.  His injury occurred while he was on duty.  He 
had surgery on the same knee in 1999, however, that was only for 
an ACL tear. This current injury was on the cartilage in the 
knee.  The two injuries have nothing to do with each other.  

In support of his request the applicant submitted copies of his 
AF IMT 348, Line of Duty Determination, medical documents, 
active duty orders and other supporting documents.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Indiana Air National 
Guard in the grade of Master Sergeant, E-7.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force at Exhibits C and D.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/SGPF recommends denial.  SGPF states they received two 
incomplete requests for MEDCON orders from the applicant on 
27 October 201I and 15 November 2011, respectively.  The 
requests were returned without action as the lacked the required 
documentation in accordance with (IAW) Medical Continuation 
Policy Guidelines for Wounded, Ill, and Injured (WII) Air 
Reserve Component (ARC) Airmen.  They received a third MEDCON 
request on 5 March 2012, and forwarded it to the Air Force 
Medical Operations Agency (AFMOA), MEDCON validator for 
validation, approval, and certification.  AFMOA determined the 
applicant was not eligible for MEDCON orders due to the lack of 
extensive ongoing medical care.  His only treatment at that time 
was a home exercise program.  They further advised if the 
applicant was able to produce substantial documentation 
constituting the need to be placed on MEDCON orders to provide 
that information as soon as possible.  As an alternative, IAW 
DoDD 1241.1 and DoDI 1241.2, “if the member can perform military 
duties but cannot return to his/her civilian job they may be 
eligible for incapacitation pay which is administered by the ARC 
component.”  The applicant failed to provide evidence of a 
successful appeal of the denial of his request for MEDCON 
orders.

The complete NGB/SGPF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

1.  AFMOA/SGHI recommends denial.  SGHI states the applicant 
sought treatment for an LOD condition while on Title 10, 12301 
(D) orders from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2011.  An LOD was 
initiated on 30 August 2011, and found to be In Line of Duty 
(ILOD) on 23 November 2011, by the Wing Appointing Authority.  
On 24 February 2012, HQ's ANG completed a DD 261, Report of 
Investigation of Line of Duty and Misconduct, and found the 
injury to be LOD-Service Aggravated.  An Air Force Form 469, 
Duty Limiting Condition Report, was initiated on 19 August 2011, 
and completed on 10 October 2011, with duty and mobility 
restrictions of no running with a release date of 8 August 2012.  
The applicant requests that his LOD finding be changed, stating 
that the injury was not prior to military service as determined 
by HQ ANG.  However, many of the medical documents submitted 
indicate the applicant had continuous problems with his knee 
over the years.  Additionally, physical therapy notes indicate 
similar mechanisms of injury/history.  Although they do not have 
authority on LOD determinations, it appears the LOD 
determination is appropriate.  

2.  Furthermore, there is no evidence of a Command Man-Day 
Allocation System (CMAS) request for MEDCON orders, however, the 
provided advisory from NGB/SGPF, indicates the applicant 
submitted requests three separate times.  These requests were 
declined twice by NGB/SGPF for incomplete documentation and once 
by an AFMOA MEDCON validator for not having an approved 
treatment plan.  A home exercise program does not warrant 
MEDCON.  Per the advisory, they had recommended, if additional 
information became available, the CMAS request should be 
resubmitted.  It was also recommended that the applicant might 
be eligible for incapacitation pay.  

3.  ANGI 36-3001, Air National Guard Incapacitation Benefits, 
does not specify the process or guidelines on how an Air Reserve 
Component (ARC) member is determined to be eligible for 
retention, on active duty orders, until their medical condition 
is resolved.  The SAF/MR memorandum dated 9 December 2011, 
current at the time of applicant’s release from active duty, and 
recently revised on 15 August 2012, specifies the eligibility 
process for Air Reserve Component (ARC) members continuing or 
returning to Active Duty status for medical conditions.  The 
applicant’s documentation submitted at that time, per the 
ANG/SGPS, did not meet MEDCON eligibility.  

4.  The delays in submission of the MEDCON orders requests, and 
the completion of the LOD on 24 February 2012, appear to be the 
contributing factors why the applicant’s request was not 
allocated.  It was known as early as 30 August 2011, when the 
applicant’s LOD was initiated, that medical care was required.  
Had the request been submitted at any time prior to his surgery, 
there would have been sufficient time to correct discrepancies 
in the submitted MEDCON package.  It should be noted that the 
processing of the LOD from August 2011 to February 2012, does 
exceed the suggested time frame, as noted in the Line of Duty 
Determination Policy for Members of the Air Reserve Component 
(ARC) from Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Manpower and 
Reserve  Affairs), 21 Apr 2010.

The complete AFMOA/SGHI evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 8 March 2013 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  To date, a response has not been received.  

________________________________________________________________

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.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record, we see no evidence of 
error or impropriety in the LOD process and are not persuaded by 
the applicant's contentions, that he has been the victim of an 
injustice.  It appears the applicant’s medical case was properly 
evaluated under the appropriate Air Force regulations, which 
implement the law.  In our opinion, the detailed comments 
provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
adequately address these allegations.  Therefore, we adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Accordingly, in 
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.  

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 issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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 this application 
in Executive Session on 14 November 2013, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
      			, Member
			, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2013-00805:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 February 2013, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/SGPF, dated 8 March 2013.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFMOA/SGHI, dated 25 July 2013, w/atch.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 August 2013.