RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00914
            INDEX CODE:  100.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) be changed from 44G3  to  45A3
or 45S1.

Or, in the alternative:

He be discharged without recoupment  of  the  Financial  Aid  Program  (FAP)
stipend; or with recoupment of $15,000 to be paid in monthly installments.

2.  He be paid from 16 April 2007 through 13 January 2008.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DAFSC should reflect his board  certification  as  an  anesthesiologist.
He was paid for three years as an anesthesia resident.  He was told  at  the
end of his  residency  training  he  would  be  discharged.   However,  AFPC
changed their mind and advised he would be serving on active duty in  family
practice but has refused to pay him.  He disagrees and is refusing to  carry
out this unlawful order.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his AF IMT  766,
Extended Active Duty Order.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the  grade  of
captain, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of  rank  of  1
July 2002.

The applicant's military personnel records were unavailable.  The  following
information is provided by AFPC/DPAME:

The applicant signed his Financial Assistance  Program  (FAP)  contract  for
general surgery on 16 March 2004.  FAP contracts are awarded to  individuals
training in specialties that  the  Air  Force  has  identified  as  shortage
specialties.  FAP contracts are not  offered  in  specialties  where  future
requirements  are  sufficiently  met  by  the  Air  Force  Graduate  Medical
Education pipeline.  The applicant  signed  his  FAP  contract,  stipulating
that he was in training as a general surgeon, and would serve the Air  Force
in the future as a general surgeon.  Upon accepting the  conditions  of  the
FAP contract he  had  already  accepted  a  position  in  an  anesthesiology
training program but had not yet wanted to reveal his plans to  his  general
surgery program.  On 16 April 2004, as  requested  by  the  Air  Force,  the
applicant's general surgery program director provided  written  confirmation
that the applicant was in fact training  as  a  general  surgeon  and  would
graduate 30 June 2007.  Beginning 1 July  2004,  the  applicant  entered  an
anesthesiology training program.  He accepted all  entitlements  and  monies
provided by his general surgery FAP  contract  from  16 March  2004  to  the
present.  The Air Force  assumed  the  applicant  was  training  in  general
surgery.  However, during the accession process,  the  applicant  identified
himself as an anesthesiologist, completing training on 31 July 2007.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAME  recommends  denial.   DPAME   recommended   the   applicant   be
discharged with recoupment ordered  for  breach  of  contract  and  the  Air
Force's requirement for general  surgery  versus  anesthesiology.   The  Air
Force acted in good faith by sponsoring the applicant  in  general  surgery.
The Air Force will be short 31 general  surgeons  in  2007.   The  applicant
violated  the  terms  of  this  FAP  contract  and  entered   anesthesiology
training.  The  Air  Force  has  an  excess  of  anesthesiologists  with  an
additional 11 assigned (authorized 69 assigned 80 in  2007).   There  is  no
requirement for the applicant to be  accessed  into  the  Air  Force  as  an
anesthesiologist.

DPAME  received  a  request  from  ARPC/JA  to  reconsider   the   discharge
recommendation.  In the event the applicant's discharge had  been  approved,
minimal funds would have been recoupable.  As a result of this  information,
DPAME coordinated  with  DPAMP  (Physician  Assignments)  and  was  able  to
coordinate an assignment that would meet the needs of the Air  Force  (valid
vacant authorization in primary care at Wright Patterson,  and  the  ability
for the applicant to work part time at the  commander's  discretion  in  the
Department of Anesthesiology.

The Air Force acted in good faith and assumed  that  the  applicant  was  in
general surgery training.  However, 2 1/2 months into  the  FAP  program  he
voluntarily   changed   residency   training   from   general   surgery   to
anesthesiology  without  the  approval  to  do  so,  as  stipulated  in  his
contract.  Had the applicant requested this change, his request  would  have
been disapproved, based on projected future requirements.  He  accepted  all
the benefits of the  FAP  program  in  general  surgery  while  training  in
anesthesiology from 1 July 2004 to present.  There is no  valid  requirement
to support the  applicant  entering  active  duty  as  an  anesthesiologist.
Therefore, DPAME requested the applicant be accessed onto active duty  as  a
primary physician.  In coordination with  DPAMP,  an  assignment  to  Wright
Patterson AFB, OH, was coordinated affording the  applicant  opportunity  to
fulfill his contractual obligation through the FAP, and allow him to  remain
clinically competent by working part time in the  Anesthesiology  Department
at Wright Patterson at the discretion of his commander.

The complete DPAME evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states his current position is  in
anesthesiology; however his current DAFSC reflects 44G3 (primary care).   He
accepted a preliminary surgical position  which  began  1  July  2002.   His
career goal at that time was to be a neurosurgeon.  If he  could  not  be  a
neurosurgeon he was to pursue anesthesiology.  After  his  preliminary  year
in surgery, he had not matched neurosurgery and accepted a categorical  spot
in general surgery.

While interviewing for a  neurosurgery  position,  it  was  brought  to  his
attention that multiple programs required  prior  military  experience.   He
spoke with an Air Force recruiter at the end of June 2003 and the  recruiter
stated "we must process the paperwork for the current  program  you  are  in
which is general surgery."  When it was time to sign the contract  with  the
Air Force, he asked to wait one  month  because  he  would  know  then  what
program he would be a part of.  The recruiter  stated  "let's  complete  the
paperwork now and when it is time for you to  change,  we  will  cross  that
bridge.  It should not be a problem to change programs.  I believe there  is
a need for both neurosurgery and anesthesia."

He entered the Air Force and signed the FAP contract  for  general  surgery.
On 22 April 2004, he accepted a clinical  anesthesia  position.   In  August
2004, he received an email reminding him that  an  AF  Form  3934,  Hospital
Agreement, would be due  annually  in  September.   The  AF  Form  3934  was
mandatory in order for him to continue to receive  a  monthly  stipend.   He
submitted the required form to the Air Force with the signature of  his  new
program director in anesthesia which also indicated he was in good  standing
and would graduate on time, 30 June 2007, in  the  anesthesia  program.   He
assumed that this document made it clear that he was in  anesthesia.   Since
he did not hear back from them concerning the change of program  along  with
his stipend not interrupted, he believed the change was approved.

The Air Force did not act in good  faith  and  assumed  he  was  in  general
surgery, despite his submission of the AF Forms 3934  indicating  otherwise.
He  is  certain  that  the  Air  Force  would  not  pay  the   FAP   stipend
($137,220.67) for 38 consecutive months without knowing that he  was  in  an
anesthesia  residency.   He  is  currently  working  in  anesthesiology  and
believes his DAFSC should reflect the change.  He has not  been  trained  in
primary care and has no desire to work there.

The applicant's complete response 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 an error or an 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error  or  injustice.   In  this
respect,  the  applicant  believes  his  DAFSC  should  reflect  his   board
certification  in  anesthesia.   However,  we  are  in  agreement  with  the
position taken by the Physician Education Branch that the applicant  entered
an agreement with the Air Force in the general surgery program and  the  Air
Force acted in good faith assuming that he  was  attending  the  appropriate
training.  The applicant contends contrarily that  because  he  periodically
submitted AF Forms 3934 that indicated he was in the anesthesia program  his
switch was made clear and the Air Force's silence led  him  to  believe  his
change was approved.  We are  not  persuaded  by  his  assertions  that  the
actions taken to utilize him in a position commensurate with  the  needs  of
the Air Force were made in error, nor are we persuaded that he has been  the
victim of an injustice.  Regarding his alternative request  that  we  direct
his discharge from the Air Force, we are compelled to note that  the  extent
of the authority of the AFBCMR is  limited  by  law  to  the  correction  of
errors and removal of injustices in Air Force records.  Accordingly,  it  is
our opinion that this Board is not the appropriate forum  to  determine  the
applicant's suitability for continued service.   Air  Force  officials  have
already taken discharge  into  consideration  but  have  reconsidered  their
position and decided to resolve this matter  in  the  best  possible  manner
that would be reasonably beneficial  to  both  the  applicant  and  the  Air
Force.  Further, if discharge is his desire, there are administrative  means
available in which he may pursue voluntary separation.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of persuasive 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 the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 17 June 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Barbara J. Barger, Member
                 Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2008-00914 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 February 2008, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAME, dated 8 April 2008.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 April 2008.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.





                 JAY H. JORDAN
                 Panel Chair