RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01820

                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for  promotion  to
the grade of colonel for the Calendar Years 2000A and  2001A  for  the
Medical Corps Central Colonel Selection Boards.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The request by exception is based on an administrative error as stated
in AFI 36-2501 6.3.1 (atch #2).  As a podiatrist, he has competed  for
promotion in the Biomedical Science Corp (BSC)  when  the  competitive
category to which he should belong is in the Medical Corp (MC).

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a  copy  of  AFI  36-2501,
Chapter 6, AFI 44-119, The Equal  Pay  Act  of  1963,  AF  Form  2829,
Privilege List - Podiatry, Podiatry Proficiency Standards, Facts About
Compensation  Discrimination,   letter   from   the   Chief,   Special
Assignments Branch.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on  extended  active  duty  in  the
grade of lieutenant colonel.  He was commissioned a Captain  into  the
Biomedical Sciences Corps (BSC) in accordance with AFI 36-2005.  Since
1981, he has been categorized as a member of the BSC.

Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to  the  grade
of colonel by the CY2000A and 2001A BSC selection boards.

Applicant has received seven OPR's since he was promoted to the  grade
of lieutenant colonel, all of which reflects "Meets Standards."

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAMW indicates podiatrists are classified as  belonging  to  the
“Biomedical Clinicians Utilization Field”, 42XXX.  They  do  not  fall
under any of the Medical  Corps  areas:   Physical  Utilization  Field
(44XX),  Surgery  Utilization  Field  (45XX),  or  Aerospace  Medicine
Utilization (48XX).

DPAMW recommended denial and stated in order to meet a  Medical  Corps
selection board, an individual must be a member  of  that  competitive
category--Medical Corps.  The applicant does not meet the AFI or AFMAN
guidelines for being in the Medical Corps.  The applicant has  been  a
BSC for 21 years and should continue in that competitive category  for
all future promotion considerations.

AFPC/DPAMN complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO states that per Title 10, Chapter 36, paragraph 621,  under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, the  Secretary  of
each military department shall establish  competitive  categories  for
promotion.  Each officer whose name appears on  an  active  duty  list
shall be carried in a competitive category of officers.   Officers  in
the same competitive  category  shall  compete  among  themselves  for
promotion.

DPPO recommends disapproval.  Applicant has met the central  selection
boards as a BSC officer to the grade of major, lieutenant colonel  and
colonel.  There are no provisions in the law to allow  an  officer  to
meet central selection board in a competitive category other than  the
one he is originally classified in on the active duty list.  In  order
to be considered in another competitive category, the applicant  would
have to apply for a competitive category transfer.   If  eligible  and
approved, this would allow him to compete at future  promotion  boards
in a different competitive category.

AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air  Force  evaluations  and  stated  that  his
complaint  goes  into  detail  on  the  current  privileging  and  job
responsibilities of podiatrists and how these differ little  from  his
medical counterparts.  Podiatry is one  of  four  medical  professions
that is fully licensed and qualified to practice medicine and surgery.
 The four are:  Medicine, Dentistry, Podiatry and Veterinary Medicine.
 Since the Air Force does  not  utilize  Veterinarians  in  Veterinary
Medicine, that part of the issue is moot.  Veterinarians  in  the  Air
Force  are  utilized  as  Public  Health  Officers  and  there  is  no
requirement for a Public Health Officer to be a Veterinarian.

The applicant is still requesting a Medical Corps SSB or an equivalent
and equal SSB for reconsideration to the  rank  of  colonel.   If  the
AFBCMR will not evaluate the issue as it  relates  to  the  Equal  Pay
Issue, he will seek a judicial settlement.

Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice  warranting  a  change  in  his
competitive category for promotion.  After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his  request  should
be granted.  We noted that the Air Force indicates that there  are  no
provisions in the law to allow an officer to meet a central  selection
board in a competitive category other than the one  he  is  originally
classified in on the active duty list.  The Board  finds  no  evidence
the applicant was treated differently than  other  similarly  situated
individuals.  Furthermore, based on  our  review  of  the  record,  it
appears that the applicant has been very successful in  competing  for
promotion in his  competitive  category  during  the  past  21  years.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling 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 a 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  02-01820
in Executive Session on 12 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:


                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
                 Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 01, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAMW, dated 10 Jun 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 10 Sep 02.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Sep 02.
      Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant’s Response, dated 25 Sep 02.






      MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
      Panel Chair