RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01636
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
      BRENT A. PONCE   COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

      MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 Dec 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank to the grade of major be changed from 16 Feb 05 to  10  May
02.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Promotion from captain to major in the Medical Corps occurs six  years  from
the date of graduation from medical school.  He was not  promoted  to  major
until nearly nine years after his  graduation.   The  delay  was  due  to  a
Statement of Understanding (SOU) he signed prior to  entering  a  redeferred
residency that waived his privilege to be promoted with his peers.  The  Air
Force policy is different from the promotion  policies  within  the  Medical
Corps of the Army and Navy.  In his situation, physicians with prior  active
duty entering a redeferred  residency  are  susceptible  of  being  promoted
after physicians entering a  deferred  residency  directly  out  of  medical
school.  Physicians without prior military  service  entering  the  military
after residency are given credit for their training and enter as a major  if
six years have passed from medical school  graduation.   Physicians  in  the
Army and Navy are promoted to major six  years  after  graduation,  even  if
residency is deferred.  The permission  he  received  to  pursue  additional
training was granted on the Air Force's need  for  orthopedic  surgeons  and
their inability to train  an  adequate  number  of  surgeons.   Constructive
credit is given either after medical school or completion of training  -  if
the residency began immediately after medical school.  Physicians who  serve
on active duty before entering residency are eligible for  promotion  during
residency only if they are on active duty or entered a sponsored  residency.
 This typically is not punitive since training in the  majority  of  medical
specialties is less than four years, resulting  in  return  to  active  duty
before the six year promotion point.

Applicant acknowledges he signed the contract but states as a young  captain
in the military, he did not  fully  understand  the  implications.   With  a
reply deadline of ten days he  was  not  given  adequate  time  nor  was  he
directed to receive legal counsel about the ramifications of the SOU.   None
of his senior Air Force colleagues understood its implications  and  several
Air Force physicians reassured him the  contract  meant  he  would  not  get
promoted during residency and  he  would  automatically  get  promoted  upon
return to active duty since the prevailing understanding in  the  Air  Force
Medical Corps was "all physicians are promoted to major at six  years  after
medical school graduation."

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
documentation associated with his request for  correction  of  his  rank,  a
copy of his SOU, email communiqués and Officer Performance Reports.

His complete submission with attachments is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to  this  application  are  contained  in  the
evaluation prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAME recommends denial.  DPAME states applicant was sponsored  through
the Armed  Forces  Health  Professions  Scholarship  Program  (AFHPSP)  from
August 1992 through May 1996.  He was sponsored for a  preliminary  year  in
general surgery from 1 Jul 96 through 30 Jul 97.  He  applied  to  the  1997
Joint Service Graduate Medical Education Selection  Board  for  a  four-year
residency training program in  Orthopedic  Surgery,  requesting  redeferment
(unfunded training) as his number one location preference.  He was  approved
to enter the unfunded training  from  1  Jul  99  through  30  Jun  03.   He
accepted the offer on 30 Jan 98.

Applicant states "with a reply  deadline  of  ten  days,  I  was  not  given
adequate time nor  was  I  directed  to  receive  legal  counsel  about  the
ramifications of this  Statement  of  Understanding."   He  was  provided  a
redeferment package on 8 Jan 99 which contained  the  identical  information
provided to him on 16 Mar 99 indicating the dates of approved training as  1
Jul 99 through 30 Jun 03.  The additional redeferment package  was  provided
as a result of a letter of acceptance dated  15  May  99  from  Brigham  and
Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School.  The applicant states he would  not
have been allowed to enter the residency if he did  not  sign  the  contract
stating "While a  choice  was  given,  I  felt  I  had  no  choice  and  was
functionally coerced into signing the  agreement."   However,  he  requested
redeferment as his number one  location  preference.   Active  Duty  Service
Commitments (ADSC) are factors  when  active  duty  AF  officers  apply  for
training.  His ADSC for redeferred training is the least  of  all  three  of
his options.  He separated from the Air Force in January (sic)  [May]  2006,
upon completion of his ADSC.

Based  on  an  established  funded  man-year  ceiling  of  900,  redeferment
training is used to augment training requirements.  Currently the Air  Force
has  1,400  physicians  in  funded  and  unfunded  training;  36  of   these
physicians are in redeferred training.  He was selected for his  number  one
specialty  and  location  choice  and  voluntarily  entered  a   contractual
agreement.

The complete DPAME evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16  Jun
06 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  In  this  respect,  applicant  requests
his date of rank to major be changed to coincide to what it would have  been
had he not  entered  into  a  redeferred  residency  program.   Amongst  his
contentions,  he  believes  the  SOU  he  signed  in  conjunction  with  his
redeferral is inequitable  and  inconsistent  with  the  policies  of  other
branches of service.  After a thorough review of the evidence  presented  we
are not persuaded that corrective action is warranted in this  case.   While
the Air Force's policy with respect to unfunded  training  may  seem  unfair
to the applicant as compared to the policies  of  other  services,  evidence
has not been presented to show that he  has  been  treated  any  differently
from similarly situated  Air  Force  officers.   The  applicant  voluntarily
entered into the agreement and it is our opinion that  the  stipulations  of
the SOU are clear and very specific regarding its consequences.   Therefore,
finding no error in this case and in the absence  of  evidence  which  would
persuade us he has been the victim of an injustice, 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 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-2006-
01636 in Executive Session on 26 Jul 06 and 28 Jul 06, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
      Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 May 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 7 Jun 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jun 06.




                                   JAY H. JORDAN
                                   Panel Chair