RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00637
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be entitled to Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders starting 
on 20 Sep 12 vice 10 Oct 12, based on his injury he sustained In 
the Line of Duty (INLOD).  

By letter, dated 14 Aug 13, the applicant amended his request to 
start his MEDCON orders, 28 Sep rather than 20 Sep 12.

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He suffered a knee injury during a deployment and a LOD was 
approved; however, his MEDCON orders did not start until 
10 Oct 12.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
ILOD paperwork; copies of AF Forms 938, Request and 
Authorization for Active Duty Training/Active Duty Tour, dated 
28 Jul 11 and 2 Oct 12, and various other documents.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served on a temporary tour of active duty from 
12 Jan – 3 Jul 12.  On 15 Mar 12, the applicant was injured 
during a deployment.  

On 3 Aug 12, the LOD process began and on 20 Sep 12, the Air 
Force Reserve Vice Commander (AFRC/CV), found that the applicant 
had an injury that Existed Prior to Service, Service Aggravated 
(EPTS/SA) and was within AFRC guidelines.  

The applicant was placed on MEDCON orders from 10 Oct 12 – 9 Nov 
12.

________________________________________________________________


THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFMOA/SGHI recommends denial.  SGHI notes that no fault or delay 
was attributable to government officials and he has not provided 
sufficient documentation to justify his eligibility for MEDCON 
orders.  

SGHI adds that the applicant’s documentation provided to support 
his claim were copies of his finalized LOD, copies of military 
orders, and miscellaneous personnel documentation.  The 
submitted documents make no reference as to why the member would 
be eligible for MEDCON orders.  The actual MEDCON request 
according to records in the Command Manday Allocation System 
(CMAS) show that the request was submitted on 24 Sep 12 and 
validated by AFMOA MEDCON staff on 27 Sep 12 for a MEDCON order 
start date of 10 Oct 12.  The medical documentation provided 
shows that the next medical treatment appointment was not until 
10 Oct 12 as notes reflect his treatment was placed on hold so 
that he could go on a short notice TDY.  His MEDCON request was 
allocated for 10 Oct 12 and he was cleared for full duty on 
15 Oct 12, per the medical documentation shown in the Armed 
Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA).  

The complete SGHI evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

His civilian occupation is also as a flight engineer and as 
validated by AFMOA, the injury he sustained during deployment 
prevented him from performing both his civilian and Reserve 
occupations.  During this time he was unable to return to his 
primary occupation because rehabilitative physical therapy was 
required daily.  He believes it is a just request for the order 
to commence the day following validation by AFMOA.  

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  While the 
applicant states that his MEDCON orders should have started on 
28 Sep 12, he has not provided substantial evidence to support 
his request.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of AFMOA and adopt its rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an 
error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, 
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-2013-00637 in Executive Session on 19 Nov 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 13. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFMOA/SGHI, dated 1 Jul 13.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Aug 13, w/atchs.
1 2