RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01290 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank to major be corrected to reflect 21 December 2010 for qualifying constructive service credit (CSC). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Upon being commissioned into the Medical Corps, he should have received two and one half years of service credit for post- bachelors-degree coursework that was completed in preparation for medical school. Additionally, he should have received two years of service credit for advanced Masters in Business Administration degree. He has submitted a memo which supported other officer’s request for service credit which was granted. Medical Corps officers receive one year of service credit for each year of commissioned service on active duty, or in an active status while participating in an educational program leading to appointment into the Medical Corps. The Air Force Personnel Center’s (AFPC’s) clear policy on this rule has been to award service credit to officers for medical school prep courses completed during periods of prior active commissioned service. He completed 33 credit hours of medical preparation coursework while serving as an active duty line officer – thus he satisfied the commissioned service on active duty elements. These 33 hours also constitute an educational program. The AFI does not define the term, but the example provided adopts the program definition of education from the statute of veterans educational benefits as “any curriculum or any combination of unit courses or subjects pursued at an educational institution which is generally accepted as necessary to fulfill requirements for the attainment of a predetermined and identified educational, professional or vocational objective.” Rule 10, on its face, supports his request for service credit. He should receive two years’ service credit for completing his Masters of Business Administration and two and one half years’ service credit for his medical school preparation courses. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is active duty Air Force serving in the grade of major. Data extracted from the Air Force advisory reflect that in May 2000, the applicant was commissioned as second lieutenant through the USAF Academy as a Line of the Air Force officer and served on active duty until he separated as a captain in August 2006. He was then commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Air Force Reserves to attend the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship Program (AFHPSP) in August 2006. Upon completion of AFHPSP, in April 2010, he was reappointed to the grade of captain in the Reserves and accessed to extended active duty (EAD) in June 2010. He was awarded his Master's in Business Administration in June 2004. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits B and C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAN recommends denial. Constructive Service Credit is computed in accordance with 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, implemented by DODI 6000.13, Medical Manpower and Personnel, and prescribed by 10 USC 12207. CSC is used to determine the commissioning/entry to active duty grade based on successful completion of education, training and professional experience. Entry grade credit (not CSC) is also earned as stated in AFI 36-2008. Officers are commissioned in the Reserve of the Air Force under AFI 36-2005, and then accessed to active duty (regular) under AFI 36-2008, Service Dates and Dates of Rank. DoDI 6000.13 continues by stating a period of time shall be counted only once when computing entry grade credit and qualifying periods of less than one full year shall be proportionately credited to the nearest day. DoDI 6000.13, paragraph 6.1.2.2. and AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4., authorizes 4 years CSC to be granted for completion of first professional degree and credit for master's and doctorate degrees in health professions other than medicine and dentistry, whether it is the primary or an additional advanced degree. However, these policies do not authorize service credit to be granted for baccalaureate, lower degrees or undergraduate coursework, in accordance with DoDI 6000.13, paragraph 6.1.2.2. and AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4., Rule 5 and Table 2.7., Rule 26 states applicants are authorized up to 24 months credit for masters degrees; however, the degree must add adjunctive skills to the primary specialty and contribute directly to performance in the specialty in which being appointed. The applicant’s master’s degree was previously reviewed and disapproved by the AFPC Chief of the Physician Education Branch on 4 January 2010 and 17 March 2014 and again by the Chief of Air Force Physician Education on 16 September 2014. The justification for denial was that the degree did not add adjunctive skills to his primary specialty nor did it contribute directly to the performance of his specialty. The applicant requests service credit for time spent in an educational program as a line officer before joining the Medical Corps. He states he should have received two and one half years of service credit for post-bachelors-degree coursework that he completed in preparation for medical school (med school prep courses). However, he is not entitled to receive service credit for this period of time in accordance with DoDI 6000.13, AFI 36-2005 and legal analysis from the AFPC Legal office. The applicant also requests 43 days credit for his medical school summer service time under AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4, Rule 9. The period of time the applicant requests credit for was during time he spent as a commissioned Reserve officer while attending AFHPSP. Credit for time spent in AFHPSP is awarded under the 4-years of credit received for his MD degree. Dual credit for same periods of time is not authorized as mentioned in paragraph 4a. DoDI 6000. l 3 and AFI36-2005 does not authorize awarding credit for undergraduate education. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to service credit for the time spent completing undergraduate (pre-medical) coursework. The complete AFPC/DPAN evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/JA recommends denial. In analyzing what is the proper award of credit for previous active duty service for an officer being commissioned into the Medical Corps (MC) under circumstances like those of the applicant, we begin with the governing statute. Section 12207 of Title 10, USCA, sets the rules for the award of actual service credit and constructive service credit for the commissioning of officers into a specialty (like MC) where advanced education is required. For actual service credit [Section 12207(a)], the statute leaves it up to DoD to set the rules on limiting that credit. DoDI 6000.13 is the implementing directive for Section 12207 for all the services. Paragraph 6.1.1 sets out the rules for awarding prior commissioned service credit. Subparagraph 6.1.1.1 provides for a year-for-year credit for any prior active commissioned service in the corps or professional specialty in which the officer is being appointed; paragraph 6.1.1.2. provides for ½ day credit for prior active commissioned service not in the corps or specialty in which being appointed. Paragraph 6.1.1.3. is the subparagraph that this case brings into play. The first sentence addresses actual prior commissioned service; the rest of the paragraph refers to constructive service credit awarded under paragraph 6.1.2 and reads [Credit shall be awarded as follows:] "Commissioned service on active duty or in an active status while participating in an educational program leading to appointment in a specialty in which constructive service credit is awarded (emphasis added), shall be awarded day-for-day credit for service performed." This rule has in turn been incorporated in Rule 10, Table 2.4, AFI 36-2005: [If the individual has successfully completed:] "Commissioned service on active duty or in an active status while participating in an educational program leading to appointment in the MC/DC corps." (emphasis added). The applicant took various undergraduate courses which he claims to be "med school prep" at Rose State College and the University of Central Oklahoma. However, these courses were taken as part of a program leading to an undergraduate degree in Engineering and Science, not a medical degree followed by appointment in the MC. While some of these courses (biology, genetics, etc) might well be helpful--if not required--as part of the education necessary to gain entry into/or become successful at, medical school, they are at most part of a program leading to admission to medical school, not part of a program "leading to appointment in the MC/DC corps." Only courses taken as part of an actual medical school program, the completion of which can result in appointment in the MC, would qualify. In short, undergraduate courses that are part of a program leading to a bachelor's degree will never qualify under Rule 10. To determine otherwise would mean that any undergraduate courses leading to an undergraduate degree--which could be viewed as an indirect part of the overall process leading to any advanced degree (because an undergraduate degree is required for entry into medical school [or dental or law school]), or might be helpful to a person contemplating medical school--would be given full day-for-day credit. This broad interpretation is clearly not what we believe the statute and DoD Instruction contemplate. The complete AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the advisories fail to address the argument that AFPC has granted identical service requests for officers who were similarly situated. In 2014, other medical officers told him that they obtained service credit in 2013 from AFPC for med school prep courses. AFPC has neither denied this nor asserted that it later reversed those 2013 decisions. Acting through counsel, he requested further details about these kinds of decisions. AFPC, citing confidentiality concerns, declined to respond. He provided an example memo with the reasoning and while it may not offer the best interpretations of the service credit rules, it offers plausible interpretations of those rules, and AFPC adopted those interpretations in 2013. AFPC should apply the same interpretations to all similarly-situated service members. The JA analysis does not mention the example memo, but clearly contradicts the example memo’s interpretation of the service credit rules in two crucial ways. First, the JA analysis presumes that med school prep courses are always “undergraduate” even if the person taking those courses has previously completed their undergraduate education. Second, the JA analysis interprets “educational program”, for purposes of DoDI 6000.13, paragraph 6.1.1.3, as referring only to degree plans identified on school transcripts. The JA analysis further asserts, without citation, that only "courses taken as part of an actual medical school program…would qualify". The JA analysis’s interpretations are certainly plausible, but they are not the interpretations that AFPC adopted in 2013. If AFPC had adopted the JA analysis in 2013, AFPC would never have granted this kind of service credit to anyone. Unlike the JA analysis, the example memo poses an interpretation of the rules that would characterize med school prep courses as part of an “advanced” program under particular circumstances. The author points out that he already had a baccalaureate degree at the time he undertook prerequisites, such that his subsequent education was beyond the baccalaureate degree level. The memo characterizes med school prep courses taken under these circumstances as “post-baccalaureate education” and therefore “advanced education”. Similarly, the applicant had already earned his bachelors in engineering when he took his med school prep courses. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we are not persuaded that a change in the record is warranted. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, he has not provided persuasive evidence to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs). Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the OPRs and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s records were appropriately considered for constructive service credit for his master’s degree in accordance with the applicable DoD and Air Force instructions. We also do not find the applicant is entitled to additional constructive service credit for “medical school preparation courses.” As noted by AFPC/JA, these courses were not taken as part of a medical school program, and therefore, do not qualify for constructive service credit. While the applicant has submitted memoranda from other officers he contends are similarly situated, the evidence is insufficient to substantiate his entitlement to constructive service credit. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-01290 in Executive Session on 22 July 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Memorandum, AFPC/DPAN, dated 20 Feb 15, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 24 Feb 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 May 15. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Response, dated 22 Jun 15, w/atchs.