RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01276
            INDEX CODES:  131.00, 136.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His rank be changed and an opportunity for retirement be granted.

By amendment, his records be corrected to allow him the opportunity to
serve twenty years, qualifying him for retirement; and, that his  rank
be corrected to  major  with  two  and  a  half  (2.5)  years  towards
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel, retroactive to Jul 00.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misled regarding the explanation of Sections 5 and 7B  of  AETC
Form 1430, Statement of Understanding, Applicant for  Extended  Active
Duty – USAF Health Professions.  Additionally,  he  was  coerced  into
signing a letter that he did not write.  He was lied to regarding  his
assigned rank, pay, and opportunity for retirement.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, a personal statement, copies of the AETC Form 1430, letters
of thanks/appreciation, his Officer Performance Report  (OPR)  closing
21 May 01, and  other  documents  associated  with  the  matter  under
review.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a captain, Reserve of the Air Force, on  5 Apr
00.  He was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on 21 May 00.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
captain, with a current grade  date  of  rank  of  5 Apr  97,  and  an
effective date of 21  May  00.   His  Total  Active  Federal  Military
Service Date (TAFMSD) is 21 May 00.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAMF2 recommended denial, noting that credit is awarded for full-
time work experience (minimum six months, maximum three years),  prior
service and education.  They indicated that although it could  not  be
determined what the recruiter  told  the  applicant,  all  appropriate
credit was awarded.  The applicant did initial Section 5 on AETC  Form
1430, indicating he understood that he is ineligible for  Regular  Air
Force (RegAF) Appointment.  Furthermore, he initialed  Section  7b  of
AETC Form 1430, indicating he understood under current  law  that  the
inability to complete 20 years  of  military  service  before  age  60
rendered him ineligible for retirement.  For an active duty member  to
complete twenty years, they must have come on active duty prior to age
40.  Although waivers are sometimes granted, that was not the case for
the applicant.  Recruiters are  responsible  for  ensuring  applicants
understand the retirement program prior to the AETC  Form  1430  being
initialed or signed.  AETC Form 1430 was signed by applicant on 31 Jan
00 and witnessed by Technical Sergeant (TSgt) C--- R. B---, Air  Force
Recruiting Service (AFRS).

AFPC/DPAMF2  noted  that  the  applicant  cited  the  Surgeon  General
Newsletter and AFI 36-2610, regarding retirement age  and  Conditional
Reserve Status (CRS), as being applicable to his  scenario.   However,
they indicated at the time the applicant signed AETC  Form  1430  this
was not applicable.

AFPC/DPAMF2 also noted the applicant’s statement that it was explained
to him by his recruiter that he would receive four years  constructive
credit for dental school and enter the Air Force  as  a  captain.   He
further stated that he had 17 years in  private  practice  and  should
have been given eight additional years credit, thus entering  the  Air
Force as a major.   AFPC/DPAMF2  indicated  that  AFI  36-2005  states
general dentists get four years constructive credit for dental  school
and allows entry in the grade of  captain.   Furthermore,  a  one-year
grade credit is given for every two years in private practice  with  a
cap of three years grade credit (no cap for traditional  specialists).
According  to  DPAMF2,  AFPC/DPAMD  has  the  final  determination  on
exceptions and in the applicant’s  case,  he  did  not  have  advanced
training or special qualifications that would have allowed  for  entry
as a major.

AFPC/DPAMF2 noted that the applicant further cited a fifty-seven  year
old accession that he is aware of  who  had  completed  two  years  of
active duty, separated, and was to return as a lieutenant  colonel  in
Fiscal Year 2002 (FY02).   He  cited  this  individual  as  a  general
dentist not a specialist.  According  to  AFPC/DPAMF2,  a  HQ  USAF/SG
letter, dated 15 Jan 2002, FY02 Additional Constructive Service Credit
for Health Professionals, states that general dentists are  authorized
additional credit.  Applicant entered in Fiscal Year 2002 (FY00)  when
there was not a critical shortage of dentists  and  additional  credit
was not authorized by HQ  USAF/SG.   AFPC/DPAMF2  indicated  that  the
Chief, Dental Corps Utilization  and  Education  Branch  (AFPC/DPAMD),
stated that he thoroughly reviewed applicant’s file and it appears all
procedures  were  followed.   Again,  a  determination  of  what   the
applicant was briefed by the recruiter is not possible to determine.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAMF2 evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPOC reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant
is ineligible to apply for CRS because he cannot complete 20 years  of
Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS) to include 10  years  of
Total Active Federal Commissioned Service (TAFCS) by age 60.   Reserve
officers, who are ineligible for CRS, may submit Specified  Period  of
Time Contracts to obtain active  duty  retainability.   The  applicant
will be offered a RegAF Appointment,  if  selected  for  promotion  to
lieutenant colonel, since he is able to complete 20 years of TAFMS  to
include 10 years of TAFCS be the last day of the  month  in  which  he
turns age 62.  By Air Force policy, Medical  Corps  and  Dental  Corps
officers are only offered a  RegAF  Appointment  in  conjunction  with
promotion selection to the grade of lieutenant  colonel  and  colonel.
If the applicant accepts the RegAF Appointment offer  he  will  become
eligible for an active duty retirement.

AFPC/DPPPOC indicated that they have reviewed the applicant’s request,
along with AFPC/DPAMF2’s advisory, and believe these clearly addressed
the CRS and RegAF eligibility statements the  applicant  initialed  on
the  AETC  Form  1430.   Further,  they  believe  the  statements  the
applicant initialed clearly advised  him  of  his  eligibility,  as  a
Reserve officer, for an active duty retirement and request  to  remain
on active duty by submitting SPTCs.  If selected for promotion to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel, the applicant will have  the  opportunity
to accept the RegAF Appointment and receive an active duty retirement.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPOC evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPRRP reviewed this application and indicated  that  the  United
States Code (USC), Title 10, Section 8911, provides that the Secretary
of the Air Force may, upon the officer’s request, retire a Regular  or
Reserve commissioned officer of the Air Force  who  has  at  least  20
years of service computed under Section 8926, at  least  10  years  of
which have  been  active  service  as  a  commissioned  officer.   The
applicant would not complete 20  years  of  active  service  prior  to
reaching age 60,  which  makes  him  ineligible  for  an  active  duty
retirement.  He acknowledged this fact when he  initialed  and  signed
the AETC Form 1430.  AFI 36-3207,  Separating  Commissioned  Officers,
Paragraph 3.3, stipulates that Reserve  officers  who  reach  the  age
limit of age 60, will be released or discharged.

According to AFPC/DPPRRP, the applicant is not currently eligible  for
an active  duty  retirement  and  will  never  be  able  to  meet  the
eligibility requirements of Section 8911 unless he is promoted to  the
grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  and  accepts  a  Regular   Air   Force
appointment.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRRP evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response, the  applicant  indicated  that  he  was  misled  and
coerced into signing documents with  incorrect  information  regarding
his retirement and rank during his accession into the Air Force Dental
Corps.  He believes that the avenue used to lure him was the fact that
he was a minority.  The recruiter did state that the Dental Corps  was
short of minority dentists.  He is not stating that  this  is  a  race
issue, but that it was used to recruit him.  He has fought his dilemma
for over two years.  It has  been  a  frustrating,  mental,  physical,
emotional, and financial burden for him.  He has been  to  all  levels
for guidance and was even told by the Inspector General’s (IG)  office
to get out, give his story to the Air Force Times,  and  sue  the  Air
Force.  He does not believe that it is too much to ask to work for his
country for the next  17  years  at  the  rank,  pay,  and  retirement
opportunity  he  was  promised.   He  asks  for  the  Board’s  careful
consideration in reviewing his case and, if at all possible, he  would
like to be present for a hearing.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

Subsequent to his response, statements from the  Chief,  Periodontics,
Clinical  Dentistry  Flight  Commander,   Deputy   Chief,   Operations
Management Division, the former Deputy Commander, --th
Medical Group, and the Deputy Commander, --th Dental Squadron,
were provided on behalf  of  the  applicant,  which  are  attached  at
Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   The  applicant's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  his  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find  the  applicant’s  assertions  or  the
documentation  submitted  in  support  of  his   appeal   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices
of primary responsibility (OPRs).   No  evidence  has  been  presented
which shows to our satisfaction that the applicant  was  miscounseled,
was a victim of coercion, his  constructive  service  was  erroneously
computed, or that he was treated differently from  similarly  situated
individuals.  Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the  OPRs
and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has
suffered either an error or an injustice.   Accordingly,  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   issues   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 02-
01276 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 03, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
      Mr. Michael Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 20 Jun 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPOC, dated 9 Sep 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 4 Oct 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, applicant, dated 2 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit H.  Letters, in applicant’s behalf, dated 13 Jan 03,
                14 Jan 03, 15 Jan 03, and 16 Jan 03.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair