SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-02441-3

XXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

The Board reconsider his request to be placed on medical continuation (MEDCON) orders for the period of 21 Aug 15 through 16 Feb 16.

RESUME OF THE CASE

The applicant is a currently serving Air Force Reserve master sergeant (E-7).  On 12 Sep 17, the Board considered and denied his request for MEDCON orders for the period 21 Aug 15 through 16 Feb 16, for knee surgery and post-operative recovery, finding the applicant had provided insufficient evidence of an error or injustice to justify relief.  On 29 Aug 19, the Board reconsidered and denied his request.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board remained unconvinced the evidence presented demonstrated an error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board recommended against correcting the applicant’s records  

For an accounting of the applicant’s original request and subsequent reconsideration, and the rationale of the earlier decisions, see the AFBCMR Letter and Record of Proceedings at Exhibits E and J.

On 9 Apr 20, the applicant requested reconsideration of his request to be placed on MEDCON orders for the period of 21 Aug 15 through 16 Feb 16, due to new evidence, dated 16 Dec 19.  He contends that due to administrative errors he was not briefed a new Line of Duty (LOD) determination was required for his left knee replacement surgery and right knee surgery.  It was not until after the left knee surgery was completed that he was informed he was not on orders.  To his knowledge, and in good faith, he completed all paperwork as directed prior to the surgery, and should have been placed on orders. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit K.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DPFA, recommends denying the application.  The applicant reported left knee pain while deployed in 2010 and had a LOD determination from 2011 for sprains and strains of the knee and leg; left meniscal tear.  The LOD submitted in 2015 was no longer valid as the acute injury had been treated and the applicant was returned to duty.  The subsequent care, including knee replacement surgeries (both left and right), would not have met MEDCON eligibility criteria, as there were no specific LOD determinations for the applicant’s chronic arthritis, the indication for the bilateral knee surgeries.  Per AFI 36-2910, Line of Duty (LOD) Determination, Medical Continuation (MEDCON), and Incapacitation (INCAP) Pay, paragraph 1.7.1. a LOD determination is accomplished for a single illness, injury or disease and cannot be reused to claim subsequent benefits and entitlements after a member has been returned to duty without restrictions pertaining to the original illness, injury or disease.  As noted previously, at the time of the initial Board for Correction of Military Record filing, in-depth case research demonstrated that the applicant had been returned to duty (which deemed the LOD no longer valid), and had performed military duties since surgical treatment of the LOD condition and subsequent recovery, and no new LOD had been submitted indicating that any re-injury or service aggravation had occurred.  The memorandum provided by the Aerospace Medicine Squadron (AMDS) technician does not provide any substantive new evidence, and does not change the fact that no LOD was submitted, or has been submitted, that could be considered to have rendered the applicant eligible for MEDCON.  In addition, the applicant himself indicates that he had been employed as a motion picture camera-man prior to his knee replacement surgeries, which included carrying and wearing heavy equipment, frequently on uneven terrain.  Combined with his return to duty as noted above, and the fact that his knee osteoarthritis was previously noted to be pre-existing, this further suggests that osteoarthritis would be unlikely to be In Line of Duty but rather that progression to unfitness occurred as a civilian and related to civilian employment.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit L.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 29 Sep 20 for comment (Exhibit M), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board remains unconvinced the evidence presented demonstrates an error or injustice.  The Board took notice of the applicant’s complete submission and Air Force guidance, in judging the merits of the case and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  In this respect, the Board notes the applicant indicated his civilian job included carrying and wearing heavy equipment, frequently on uneven terrain.  Additionally, the applicant’s knee osteoarthritis was previously noted to be pre-existing and unlikely to be In Line of Duty but rather progression to unfitness occurred as a civilian and related to civilian employment.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-02441-3 in Executive Session on 18 Nov 20:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit E:	Record of Proceedings, w/ Exhibits A-D, dated 12 Sep 17.
Exhibit J:	Addendum Record of Proceedings, w/ Exhibits F-I, dated 29 Aug 19.
Exhibit K:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 9 Apr 20.
Exhibit L:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DPFA, dated 14 Sep 20.
Exhibit M:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 29 Sep 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.