RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01022
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Date of Separation (DOS) be changed to 28 years of commissioned service or at least until announcement of the results of the CY2003 Colonels Promotion board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he accepted the active duty recall, he signed a statement of understanding indicating that he would be considered for promotion to colonel in the primary zone (IPZ) by the CY2003 06 Promotion Board.  He says this was the reason he accepted the extended active duty tour.  He was told he had to sign the statement of understanding prior to acceptance of active duty.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of the statement of understanding, dated 16 Nov 98 (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant, a Reserve Officer, was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty (EAD) effective 6 January 1999, under the Voluntary Reserve Officer EAD Program.  Based on his total active federal military service date (TAFMSD) of 15 January 1982, the applicant has an established date of separation of 31 January 2002.

On 16 November 1998, he signed a Statement of Understanding, indicating that he understood his DOR was tentatively calculated as 1 October 1998 and that he understood that he would be eligible for the IPZ consideration to colonel in CY2003.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 8 May 2001, the Proc Programs and Procedures, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, considered the applicant’s request and recommended the request be denied.  They state the applicant is a reserve officer who applied for recall to active duty under the Voluntary Air Battle Manager Recall Program.  He was advised on 24 August 1998 that he was selected for the recall and subsequently ordered to extended active duty on 6 January 1999 (SO AGA-023).

His established date of separation is 31 January 2002.  At that time, he will have a total of 20 years and 16 days of total active federal military service (TAFMS) and will have to separate in accordance with Air Force policy, which limits reserve officers to 20 years of TAFMS.

They further state that as a part of the assessment of the applicant’s recall package, a tentative date of rank was calculated to determine when he would be eligible to meet the 06 active duty list (ADL) promotion board.  The Statement of Understanding the applicant signed is an instrument used to have the applicants acknowledge they are aware when they will be eligible to meet their first active duty promotion board “(if they are still on active duty at the time the board meets).”  In the applicant’s case, there was no guarantee he could remain on active duty past his established DOS to meet the CY2003 promotion board.  

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant requests he be granted an exception to policy.  He believes that allowing him to serve past 20 years of active duty is in the best interest of the Air Force.  He is an Air Battle Manager, which is a critically short career field and has been for quite some time.

When he accepted the recall, he did not realize that he would be forced to retire after three years and, had he known, he would have planned his life accordingly, knowing that he would need to find employment after the end of that period.

He further explains his understanding of the whole process and the documents he signed and what impact they would have on his career in the future.

In support of his response, he submitted a copy of his initial recall package and letters of recommendation from the commander of USCENTAF, his group and squadron commanders.

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 probable error or 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  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 probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 2 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Vice Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Apr 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, dated 8 May 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Jun 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Jul 01, w/atchs.

                                   
                                   Vice Chair