RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01868
		INDEX NUMBER:  131.10;135.01
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His nonselection for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board be removed or considered a below-the-zone (BPZ) nonselection.

His Date of Rank (DOR) be changed to 16 Mar 98, the date he entered Extended Active Duty (EAD).

He be made in-the-promotion-zone (IPZ) eligible for the CY02A Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Because of changes in the way AFPC interpreted his promotion eligibility when he began an EAD tour, he was not able to meet an active duty lieutenant colonel promotion board in a Below-the-Promotion-Zone (BPZ) category.  When he did meet an active duty board, it was an IPZ board and he had fewer years of active duty service and Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) than fellow candidates.  Based on his 8 Mar 96 DOR, he would have normally met the IPZ Reserve lieutenant colonel board, but was ineligible because he is on active duty.

His phase points (average number of years and months of commissioned service that an officer should complete when promoted to a particular grade) are where they should be for IPZ consideration by the CY02A Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board.

The policy correction that allows Reserve officers serving an EAD tour to compete for active duty promotions did not address the DOR issue, which in his case gives him a DOR several years beyond other candidates competing for promotion.

The applicant’s 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 relevant office of the Air Force found at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of the applicant’s requests.  On 21 Apr 00, the applicant was advised of the change to promotion eligibility for officers in the Limited Period Recall Program (LPRP).  Applicant was provided the option of curtailing his EAD tour or continuing on EAD and meeting an active duty promotion board.  On 4 May 00, applicant elected to continue on active duty and understood that he would be considered for promotion by active duty promotion boards.  Applicant also requested to meet all boards he had missed since being on active duty.  Applicant was scheduled to meet a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY99B Lieutenant Colonel Board (30 Nov 99) as an IPZ candidate and also became eligible for the CY00 Lieutenant Colonel Board as an IPZ candidate.  Applicant met and was nonselected by both boards.

On 26 Nov 00, applicant applied through the AFBCMR to have his nonselections from the CY99B and CY00A Lieutenant Colonel Boards removed based on his having met the Boards with one OPR and not having the appropriate level of PME.  AFPC/DPPPOO supported his request and it was approved by the AFBCMR.  Applicant was notified that he would become be eligible to meet the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Board as an IPZ candidate.  At no time did the applicant request his tour be curtailed or that he be removed from the active duty list.

Applicant contends he was not provided the opportunity to meet any BPZ promotion boards.  As he states, active duty officers usually meet two BPZ boards before being considered IPZ.  It is not unusual for officers who enter active duty either through recall programs; interservice transfers, or based on the amount of constructive service credit an officer may have.  In addition, it is not mandated by law that an officer be provided BPZ considerations.

Applicant contends his DOR should be changed to allow him to compete IPZ for the CY02 Lieutenant Colonel Board.  He indicates that the 1 Oct 96 change to AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, was done at a time when EAD officers were not allowed to compete for active duty promotions.  This was not true for all Reserve officers coming onto active duty.  Only Reserve officers in the LPRP were ineligible for promotion.  All other Reserve officers entering active duty under recall programs or other transfer programs maintained the grade and date of rank they had prior to entering active duty.  In addition, many of them became immediately eligible for promotion IPZ and were not afforded the opportunity to have their nonselections removed.  This is also true of officers transferring from other branches of service.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 Aug 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 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 Docket Number 02-01868 in Executive Session on 25 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 May 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 30 Jul 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Aug 02.

                                   Panel Chair