RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00716
		INDEX CODE:  102.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE	

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) be adjusted to reflect constructive service credit (CSC) for 24 months versus 18 months.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Officers accessed into the Medical Service Corps after 4 December 1987 are to be granted one year constructive credit for each year of their Master’s Degree program not to exceed 24 months.  He completed his MBA over a two-year period in 1992 and should have been granted 24 months constructive service credit.

In support of his request applicant provided a copy of AFI 36-2005, page 33-35, dated 1 May 1998, and a copy of his constructive credit calculation done in 1992.  

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the personnel data system reflects that on   8 June 1992, applicant was appointed a second lieutenant with a DOR of 26 November 1990.  He entered extended active duty with 1 year, 6 months and 13 days of CSC.

He currently serves in the grade of major and is assigned to the Medical Operations Squadron, USAF Academy, Colorado Springs, Colorado.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPAMF2 recommends denial.  CSC was calculated on 22 May 1992 using Air Force Regulation 36-15, Appointment in Commissioned Grades and Designation and Assignment in Professional Categories-Reserve of the Air Force and United States Air Force (Temporary), Table 2-4, Rule 38 (Atch 1), dated 28 November 1988, which states “If individual is to be appointed or designated as a health services officer and has completed master’s or PhD then the amount of credit awarded is 18 months (see note 11).”  Note 11 states: “Graduates of Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administrators (ACEHSA) programs may be granted 24 months.  An individual with a PhD in the specialties listed may be granted 36 months.”  The applicant is requesting additional credit using AFI 36-2005, Appointment in Commissioned Grades and Designation and Assignment in Professional Categories-Reserve of the Air Force and United States Air Force, dated 1 May 1998, which is not the publication that was in effect at the time CSC was computed.  Applicant received appropriate credit in accordance with the Air Force regulation and is not entitled to additional credit.  

The DPAMF2 evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAO recommends denial.  The Medical Service Officer Management Division recommends denial, however, if the Board approves his request, it will change his entry grade from second to first lieutenant with a date of rank of 26 May 1992.

The DPPAO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 Apr 03, for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the rules of the applicable regulations, which implement the law, were inappropriately applied or that he was denied rights to which he was entitled.  Therefore, 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.  In the absence of persuasive 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 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 Docket Number BC-2003-00716 in Executive Session on 1 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	MMember

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Feb 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 27 Mar 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAO, dated 11 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair