RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00317
		INDEX CODE:  112.02, 128.06

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His rank of appointment be changed from captain to lieutenant colonel along with the appropriate reconciliation of his military service dates.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He qualified for Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 44M3 (Qualified) and not 44M1 (Entry).  He believes his credentials relating to fellowship training in both pulmonary and critical care medicine may not have been included or properly considered in his original application with the New Jersey Air National Guard (NJANG).  Additionally, he has completed sub-specialty training in pulmonary and critical care medicine and is certified in all three areas (critical care, pulmonary and internal medicine) and is now more than 10 years post-training.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of certificates of completion of medical training, a page from Air Force Manual (AFM) 36-2105, and pertinent copies of his appointment paperwork.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, a member of the NJANG, was appointed in the grade of captain with the NJANG on 19 October 2002.  Based on his education and experience, he was awarded constructive service credit resulting in the following service dates:

	TYSD: 19 October 1992
	PSD:  19 October 1996
	TFCSD:19 October 2002

He is currently serving in the NJANG in the grade of major.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPPI recommends denial.  DPPI contends that, based on the evidence provided by the appointment documents included in his application, it is evident the applicant was awarded the correct service credit and was appointed in the correct grade.  

DPPI’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reiterates his contention that he was not awarded service credit for his full-time experience on completion of his training.  He provides excerpts from Air Force Instruction (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 19 May 2003, to support his request for appointment in the grade of lieutenant colonel.

He addresses the DPPI contention that AFI 36-2005, Table 2.1, Note 8, states that applicants with less than 14 years service credit will be appointed in the grade of captain.  He argues that Note 8 applies to officers entering extended active duty only, and the note does not apply to him as a guardsman.  He further states that Table 2.4, Rule 6 states “…one-half year of service credit is to be awarded for each year of experience up to a maximum of three years.”  Note 5 in Table 2.4 further clarifies that this credit will be computed from the day after the officer completed the education listed until the day before the appointment.  His last day of education was 30 June 1993 and the day before his appointment was 18 October 2002.  Based on Rule 6, he should have been awarded the maximum of three years service credit for the nine-years, three months, and eighteen days of full-time experience.  

In addition, Table 2.4, Rule 7, Note 6, states the applicant may be awarded service credit for specialty designated as critical or urgent in the amount of one year for each year of experience.  This service credit is only to be awarded if the applicant has received the maximum credit under Rule 6.  He states he is currently serving in a critical AFSC (receiving a cash bonus) and believes Rule 7 applies to him.  He believes the following service credit should be awarded to him:

		Education/Training – Ten years.
		Service Credit under Rules 6 & 7 of AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4 – 9 years, 3 months, and 18 days.

His total service credit would then be 19 years, 3 Months, and 18 days that would qualify him to have been appointed in the grade of lieutenant colonel.  While he acknowledges section 2.18.2.1 of AFI 36-2005 wherein it states that total entry grade shall not be more than required for an officer to be eligible for an original appointment in the grade of major, he also notes that Section 2.18.2.2 states ANG/MPP may waive the requirement and appoint lieutenant colonels in shortage specialties designated by NGB/SG.  

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office 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.  Based on the evidence provided, the applicant’s constructive service credit appears to be correct, as is the grade he was appointed in.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00317 in Executive Session on 6 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 04, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 20 Oct 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, APPLICANT, dated 15 Nov 04, w/atch.

                                   Panel Chair