RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02698 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of separation be extended from 31 May 2010 to 30 September 2010 and he be processed for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he returned from Afghanistan with a severe injury, there was not sufficient time to get the necessary treatment before his mandatory retirement date of 31 May 2010. He injured his left shoulder (rotator cuff) in August 2009 while in combat skills training. In September 2009, he received a cortisone injection. He left for Afghanistan shortly thereafter. While in Afghanistan, he received another injection in November 2009 and he also injured his neck. Upon return from that deployment, he received treatment for these injuries and was told by a senior medical technician that the Veteran’s Affairs (VA) would take care of his medical issues; or the issues would be covered by his retired active duty Tricare. He was also told that since he began treatment prior to retirement, he would be treated at no charge by Tricare. It was not until he received the Line of Duty on 11 August 2010, that he found out these statements were untrue. He continued cortisone injections in April 2010 and had surgery on his rotator cuff on 1 July 2010. He also began physical therapy for his neck issues on 30 September 2010. He was fortunate to have Tricare Standard as he was able to pay the copays. He was not seen at the VA until 8 months after his retirement date. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a timeline of the events, e-mail correspondence, medical documentation and documentation from his master personnel records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air Force Reserve. He retired on 31 May 2010 in the grade of lieutenant colonel. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility and contained at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/SGPA recommends denial. The applicant re-injured his preexisting condition during combat skills training prior to deploying in August 2009. He completed his deployment and returned home in April 2010. He was given an LOD for his service-related injury. His injury was found in the line of duty. An LOD allows service members to continue to receive care and treatment at the VA, but does not mean an MEB is warranted. To be eligible for MEB processing, there would have to be a likelihood that the condition would not resolve or improve within 12 months. The applicant’s condition improved four months after receiving care and treatment. The applicant had a mandatory separation date of 31 May 2010. He is not eligible for Medical Hold in accordance with applicable regulations. Medical Hold is not for the purpose of evaluating or treating chronic conditions, performing diagnostic studies, elective treatment or remedial defects, non-emergent surgery or its subsequent convalescence, civilian employment issues, preservation of terminal leave or any other condition which does not warrant termination of active duty. The applicant has had this condition since 2004. The complete SGPA 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 30 August 2013 for review and comment within 30 days(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received no response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 an 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. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of NGP/SGPA and adopt their 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. 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02698 in Executive Session on 27 February 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A1. DD Form 149, dated 30 May 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/SGPA, dated 24 Jul 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 13. 1