RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00453 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be continued on Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders from July 2011 through 29 January 2013. He receive a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty that indicates he was medically retired. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was injured while on active duty orders in 2005. When he returned to his home station, he was taken off orders. He argued that legally he should not be taken off orders due to his injuries; however, he remained off orders. He continued to fight this injustice and was sent to two military medical treatment facilities who confirmed his injuries. Nevertheless, his home unit told him to go see a civilian or Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) doctor. Over the next couple of years, he was treated for his injuries by the DVA doctors and continually relayed their diagnosis to his military doctors. In April/May of 2011, he was informed that his medical record was going to be submitted for a fitness for duty determination. The fitness for duty determination was sent forward and the recommendation was that due to his injuries occurring while on active duty he goes through an active duty medical evaluation board (MEB). He was eventually entered into the MEB process but was not placed on active duty orders. In November 2012, he received his retirement order, for retirement from active duty effective 29 January 2013. According to his research, he should have never been taken off orders in 2005. Additionally, when he was entered into the active duty MEB process in 2011 he should have been placed on active duty orders for the duration of the MEB process. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), the applicant is a former member of the Air National Guard who was separated from service on 28 January 2013, for the purpose of mandatory retirement resulting from permanent physical disability and was credited with 20 years, 3 months, and 24 days of service for retirement. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the appropriate Air Force offices of primary responsibility Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFA recommends denial. DPFA states that the applicant did not provide any evidence to determine whether he would be eligible for medical continuation (MEDCON) orders. DPFA further states that after a check within the Command Man-day Allocation System, there is no indication that the applicant ever submitted a request for MEDCON orders or was approved for any Title 10 orders. Entry into the MEDCON Program is voluntary and prior to being placed on MEDCON orders, a military member must sign an acknowledgement form stating they are aware of their responsibilities. An Airman may be eligible for MEDCON orders when an injury, illness, or disease is incurred or aggravated while serving on orders and that condition renders the Airman unable to perform military duties. According to SAF policy, eligibility for MEDCON orders requires a Line of Duty (LOD) determination and a finding by a credentialed military health care provider that the Airman has an unresolved health condition requiring treatment and renders the Airman unable to meet retention or mobility standards in accordance with (IAW) AFI 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards, Chapters 5 and 13. The applicant did not provide any evidence such as an LOD or qualifying orders, or a treatment plan to determine whether he would be eligible for MEDCON orders. The complete AFPC/DPFA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ARPC/DPTS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to have his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be created for his medical retirement. DPTS states that they conducted a review of the applicant’s records and there are no documents identifying that he meets the criteria for another DD Form 214. His last DD Form 214 issued was for the period of 14 September 2001 through 07 May 2003. Per AFI 36-3202, Separation Documents paragraph 4.5, Table 2, to receive a DD Form 214 a member must complete 90 days or more consecutive active duty days or one day or more if in support of a contingency operation. The complete ARPC/DPTS evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15 September 2014, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). To date, a response has not been received by this office. 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 took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We note the applicant’s contention that he should not have been taken off orders due to his injuries; however, he did not provide evidence to overcome the presumption of fitness for duty in spite of the long-standing nature of his complaint. Additionally, we note that he does not meet the criteria for a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which indicates a medical retirement. Therefore, 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 6 January 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00453 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jan 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFA, dated 120 Feb 2014. Exhibit D. Letter, ARPC/DPTS, dated 7 Aug 2014, w/atch. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 2014.