RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04485
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded four years of constructive service credit (CSC) for earning his PhD in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (TAM).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His PhD degree was approved by the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) for an educational delay.  It adds adjunctive skills to his role as a physician, and therefore qualifies for CSC under AFI 36-2005, Appointment in Commissioned Grades and Designation and Assignment in Professional Categories--Reserve of the Air Force and United States Air Force, Table 2.7, Rule 13 (Health Physics) or Rule 26 (Approved case-by-case).  This exception is consistent with DoDI 6000.13, Medical Manpower and Personnel, Sections 6.2.2.2.2. and 6.2.2.2.3. (Sic). 

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Air Force in May 04 after graduating from Air Force Reserve Officer Training School (AFROTC), and was granted an educational delay from 2004 to 2008 to pursue a combined Master’s Degree/PhD Program in TAM.

On 19 Dec 2005, the applicant received his Master’s Degree in TAM from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.  

The applicant applied to and was selected to attend Air Force Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP) to obtain his Medical Degree (MD) during the period 2008 through 2012.

On 15 May 11, the applicant received his PhD in TAM from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

On 24 Feb 12, the applicant completed Medical School at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and began his residency in Neurology, scheduled for the period 1 Jul 12 through 30 Jun 16.   

On 5 Sep 12, the applicant was awarded CSC for the period 23 February 2008 through 24 February 2012.

On 8 Apr 13, AFPC/DPANE denied the applicant’s request for award of CSC for completing his PhD in TAM, because the PhD was earned concurrently with his MD, based upon the MD having been awarded on 15 May 11.   

On 15 May 13, AFPC/DPANE again denied the applicant’s request for award of CSC for completing his PhD in TAM, because the degree does not add any adjunctive skills to the performance of his duties as a physician as required by AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4, Rule 5, Note 2.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPANF2 recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Service credit is used to determine an officer’s grade for commissioning and accession to active duty based on successful completion of education, training, and professional experience.  The applicant has previously applied for CSC to his career field functional managers at the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) Medical Corps, and they denied his request based upon their assessment that his PhD does not add adjunctive skill to his primary specialty or contribute directly to performance in the specialty in which he was being appointed, as required by DoDI 6000.13 and AFI 36-2005.  However, regardless of whether or not the applicant’s PhD adds adjunctive skill to his primary specialty, he cannot be awarded CSC for the requested period of time because the PhD was earned concurrently with his obtaining his primary Doctor of Medicine (MD) credentials.  IAW Title 10, DoDI 6000.13, and AFI 36-2005, a period of time shall be counted only once to prevent dual credit being earned for the overlapping time for degrees.  The applicant received four years of service credit for obtaining his MD during the period 24 Feb 09 (sic) through 24 Feb 12.  Therefore, he is not authorized to receive four additional years of credit for completing his PhD during the overlapping period of 15 May 09 (sic) through 15 May 11.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPANF2 evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The notes associated with AFI 36-2005, Table 2.4, Rule 5, indicate that advanced education must contribute directly to the performance of duty and the advanced degree must not have been earned concurrently with the primary credentials (i.e., MD).  According to Table 2.7, Rule 7, engineering (health related) degrees are not creditable to an officer in the Medial Corps (MC).  This is the rule that most closely fits the applicant’s degree (a PhD in TAM).  Even if, as the applicant argues, the degree should be considered one of Health Physics (Rule 13) or “other specialties when approved on a case-by-case basis” (Rule 26), the degree must add adjunctive skills to the primary specialty and must contribute directly to performance in the specialty in which being appointed.  The applicant’s career field manager, in his professional opinion, has determined the applicant’s degree does not.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He rebuts the assertion that his PhD was earned concurrently with his MD.  All of his PhD research was completed between Aug 04 and Aug 08, prior to the start of medical school in Aug 08.  Although there was a time overlap between his medical school and his defending his dissertation, in fact no new research was conducted during this period.  He was originally granted five years of educational delay to complete his PhD; however, because of making faster than average progress toward his degree, he elected to start medical school one year early, accelerating his return to the Air Force by one year.  Had he not started medical school early, all of his PhD graduation requirements would have been fulfilled prior to his starting medical school.  He also rebuts the assertion that his PhD provides no adjunctive skills to his primary specialty.  All previous evaluations concerning the applicability of his degree to his role as a neurologist and neurology resident have come from non-neurologists, while he submitted opinions from the program director of his residency training, the Air Force Consultant for Neurology, and the Assistant Director of Medical Innovation for the President of the United States, who he argues are in the best position to evaluate the value of his graduate training in his primary role as both a neurology resident and neurologist in the Air Force.  Along with submitting several letters in support of his position, he provides an illustrative example of how a project he is working on requires both of his degrees (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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion.  Although we find no evidence indicating the Air Force’s decision to deny the applicant’s request for constructive service credit (CSC) for both his PhD program in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics and medical school was somehow arbitrary and capricious, we believe that the preponderance of the evidence indicates that some form of relief is warranted.  While the Board notes the opinion in the staff advisories that the applicant’s PhD in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (TAM) is not adjunctive to the applicant’s primary specialty of neurology, and that in accordance with AFI 36-2005, Table 2.7, Rule 7, a health related engineering degree does not normally qualify for CSC toward the specialty in which the applicant is assigned, the Board believes that given the documentation submitted by the applicant outlining the work he is doing in his career field, combined with the letters of support from individuals at the top of his specialty who are familiar with his work, we believe the preponderance of the evidence suggests that in this particular situation his PhD should be considered adjunctive to his primary specialty.  We also  acknowledge the comments of the Air Force OPR indicating that because the applicant’s PhD in TAM and medical degree were awarded concurrently, and the same period of time cannot be credited twice for constructive service, the applicant’s request should be denied; however, because we believe the evidence is sufficient to conclude that his PhD in TAM is adjunctive to his primary specialty, and the applicant has provided evidence indicating that while both degrees were awarded concurrently, much of his work toward his PhD occurred prior to attending medical school, we believe it would be appropriate to credit the applicant with CSC for the portion of his PhD program that did not overlap with the time he attended medical school.  While this is not the relief the applicant seeks, in our view it is proper and fitting.  Therefore, we believe it would be appropriate to recommend correcting the applicant’s records as indicated below.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that, as an exception to policy, competent authority approved his request for constructive service credit (CSC) for the period 20 December 2005 through 24 February 2012, instead of 23 February 2008 through 24 February 2012.  

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04485 in Executive Session on 10 Jul 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPANF2, dated 31 Dec 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 3 Feb 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Mar 14.
Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.









                                   










5





FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974