RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2021-03023

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: XXXXXX
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

She be placed on Medical Continuation (MEDCON) orders instead of being released from a Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty (VLPAD) tour.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

While on a VLPAD tour, she started having a significant medical issue.  The active duty deployment availability working group (DAWG) recommended a full Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), but AFPC returned her to duty via Initial-Review-In-Lieu-Of (IRILO) six weeks prior to the end of her VLPAD tour, while she was still undergoing medical evaluation.  AFRC/SG conducted their review and disqualified her a month prior to the end of her tour.  When her tour ended, she was “separated” by AFPC.  It is her understanding that she should have been retained, and the active duty military treatment facility (MTF) should have handled her MEB with AFRC/SG making the final determination, instead she in now undergoing the MEB process as a  traditional reservist, not in any military pay status.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is an Air Force Reserve (AFR) XXXXXXXX

According to AF IMT 618, Medical Board Report, dated 16 Aug 21, the Board found that the applicant had the conditions of migraine headaches (Botox Therapy) and angina with approximate dates of origin of 15 Jul 16 and 15 Jul 19, respectively.   The board further found that both conditions incurred while entitled to basic pay, not to have existed prior to service, and to be permanently aggravated by service.  The board recommended the applicant be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 3 Apr 17, according to Special Order XXXXX, dated 13 Mar 17 (amended by XXXX, dated 4 Apr 17), the applicant was voluntarily ordered to active duty under the VLPAD program for the period X Apr XX to XX Apr XX.   

On XX Feb 20, an AFPC/DP2NP computer generated official Air Force document, with heading “Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center, Medical Retention Standards (DP2NP),” indicates that the applicant underwent an IRILO and shows that the DAWG recommended a “Full MEB,” but AFPC/DP2NP “Non-Concurred” and returned the applicant to duty. 

On 4 Mar 20, according to AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, the applicant was found fit for duty with the following restrictions:  member may be assigned or deployed to the Continental United States (CONUS), Hawaii, or Alaska installations with fixed medical treatment facilities and treatment or referral capability; member should not occupy mobility position but may be deployed with approval of gaining MAJCOM Chief of Clinical Services.

On 3 Apr 20, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, shows that the applicant was discharged with the narrative reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service” and was credited with three years and one day of active service.
	
On 23 Jun 21, AFRC/A1 determined that the applicant’s condition was Prior Service Condition (PSC) Applicable (MEB/IDES (Air Force Integrated Disability Evaluation System)) eligible.

On 25 Jun 21, AFRC/SGO, upon review of the applicant’s IRILO package, determined that the applicant was medically disqualified for further military duty and is eligible for processing through the MEB and IDES.

On 5 Aug 21, according to AF Form 469, the applicant was found fit for duty with the same restrictions as outlined in the 4 Mar 20 AF Form 469, and includes the statement that the member is undergoing a MEB to determine medical fitness for worldwide duty and retention.

On 16 Aug 21, the MEB reviewed the applicant’s case and referred the case to the IPEB. 

On 9 Sep 21, the IPEB found the applicant’s conditions prevents her from reasonably performing the duties of her office, rank, grade, or rating and recommended that she be discharged with severance pay (DWSP) with a disability rating of 10 percent IAW the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines

On 15 Oct 21, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) found both the applicant’s migraine headaches  and muscular angina conditions unfitting and recommended retirement with a disability rating of 40 percent IAW the VASRD guidelines.

On 18 Nov 21, according to Department of the Air Force Special Order XXXXX, dated 2 Nov 21, the applicant was permanently disability retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel with a compensable percentage for physical disability of 40 percent.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY/GUIDANCE

Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2008, Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty (VLPAD) for Air Reserve Component (ARC Service Members and the Career Intermission Program, 1 Feb 21.

1.3. Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty (VLPAD) for Air Reserve Component (ARC) Members. The Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty program provides members of the ANG and AFR the opportunity to temporarily help meet RegAF requirements for trained, career-oriented members in particular grades and skills in accordance with Title 10 United States Code (USC) Sections 12301(d), 12311 and 688.

3.1.1. Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty (VLPAD). Allows ARC members trained in specific AFSCs the opportunity to volunteer for EAD for three years and one day to fill vacant funded AD authorizations.
3.1.1.3. Members must have a conditional release from the ARC before the application will be processed.

3.1.1.5. Tour extensions beyond three years and one day are considered on a case-by­case basis and approved by the VLPAD Review Board. Note: VLPAD orders are AD for operational support orders and therefore limited to not more than five years in accordance with 10 USC Section 12311. 

3.1.1.5.1. A second conditional release from the ARC is required for extensions.

3.1.1.7. ARC members completing a VLPAD tour are not guaranteed return rights to the ARC position the member left. Members who wish to transfer to an ARC position upon completion of the ARC member's VLPAD tour must contact an in-service recruiter to apply for ARC assignment consideration. Members without an approved application prior to the member's date of separation will be transferred to the IRR.

10 USC §12311. Active duty agreements. (a) To provide definite terms of active duty (other than for training) for Reserves with their consent, the Secretary concerned may make a standard written agreement with any member of a reserve component under his jurisdiction requiring the member to serve for a period of active duty (other than for training) of not more than five years. When such an agreement expires, a new one may be made.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFRC/SGO, recommends partially granting the applicant’s request, by having the record show she was placed on medical hold instead of being released from a VLPAD tour.  Based upon analysis of the facts, there is evidence of an error or injustice.  The applicant erroneously underwent an evaluation by the active duty component which returned the member on an Assignment Limitation Code which allowed the applicant to be released from her orders.  It was not until evaluated by AFRC/SGO that the applicant’s IRILO was reviewed, and the applicant was found disqualified.  A PSC determination was completed by AFRC/SGO and A1, who found the condition to be PSC applicable, which directed the applicant to the MEB process.  Had the applicant been found disqualified for service initially while on active duty orders, the applicant would have been eligible for medical hold.

The applicant requested MEDCON, which is used to keep a member in status when a condition is found to be In Line of Duty (ILOD) and requires further care or treatment.  In accordance with Department of the Air Force Instruction (DAFI) 36-2910, Line of Duty (LOD) Determination, Medical Continuation Pay (MEDCON), and Incapacitation (INCAP) Pay, paragraph 6.2. MEDCON eligibility requires an LOD determination and a finding by a credentialed military provider that the member has an unresolved health condition requiring treatment that renders the member unable to meet retention or mobility standards in accordance with Department of the Air Force Manual (DAFMAN) 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards.  Further, members will be maintained on MEDCON with their consent until: the ILOD injury, illness or disease is satisfactorily resolved or the resulting disability cannot be improved by further treatment or hospitalization; the Reserve Component service member is identified for referral to the DES (using the IRILO as the referral into the DES), within one year of the initial diagnosis of the condition for which the member received an ILOD finding and the member receives a final determination of fit for duty, separated, or retired.

However, in accordance with AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement and Separation, the applicant would have been entitled to medical hold.  According to paragraph 1.12, subject to certain limitations, medical hold is a method of retaining a service member beyond an established date of separation, an approved retirement or separation date, or established high year of tenure for disability processing purposes.  AFPC/DP2NP is the only Air Force entity authorized to place Regular Air Force member on medical hold.  The authorized entities for Reserve members is AFRC/SGO.  Additionally, AFMAN 41-210, Tricare Operations and Patient Administration, paragraph 4.50.1.6, states that medical hold is a method of retaining a service member beyond an established retirement or separation date for reasons of disability processing, when presumption of fitness does not apply.  It may be necessary to place members on medical hold if AFPC/DP2NP directs a MEB, and the member is within 60 calendar days of separation or retirement.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 22 Apr 22 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFRC/SGO and finds a preponderance of the evidence substantiates the applicant’s contentions in part.  Specifically, the Board finds that AFRC/SGO is the correct reviewing authority as they maintained administrative control while the applicant was on her VLPAD tour and should have been the reviewing authority of the IRILO package and should have made the determination whether or not to place the applicant on medical hold while she was awaiting a fit-for-duty determination or a Medical Evaluation Board evaluation.  Given that the applicant’s medical conditions were ultimately found to be disqualifying and she was permanently disability retired for those conditions, the Board finds the evidence sufficient to determine that she should not have been returned to duty when her original IRILO was processed and should have been placed on medical hold while she awaited an MEB determination.  However, for the remainder of the applicant’s request, the evidence presented did not demonstrate an error or injustice.  In this regard, MEDCON orders would not apply as the applicant was on active duty orders at the time her medical condition was being evaluated and medical hold would have been the appropriate solution to retain the applicant beyond her VLPAD separation date for reasons of disability processing. Therefore, the Board recommends correcting the applicant’s records as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that she was not released from her Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty (VLPAD) tour on XX April XXXX, but was placed on medical hold and continued on active duty until her permanent disability retirement on XX November XXXX.

However, regarding the remainder of the applicant’s request, the Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

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-2021-03023 in Executive Session on 22 Jun 22:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 7 Sep 21.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFRC/SGO, dated 21 Apr 22.
Exhibit D:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 22 Apr 22.

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.