RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01094
		INDEX CODE:  110.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge order be rescinded so that he may join the New York Air National Guard (NY ANG).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He recently discovered that he was discharged from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) effective 1 November 2002.  He has been offered an Aircraft Commander position with the NY ANG and would like to serve his country again.  He entered the IRR on 24 March 1999 due to non-participation in the Air Force Reserve (AFRES).  He was not aware that he was eligible for promotion while a member of the IRR and was subsequently passed over twice, thus prompting his separation.

In support of his appeal the applicant has provided a copy of a letter to Senator John McCain as well as a copy of his last Officer Performance Report (OPR).

A complete copy of his submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant joined AFRES on 7 May 1988 and served until he was involuntarily reassigned to the IRR effective 15 October 1999, for non-participation.  Applicant acknowledged receipt and understanding of this reassignment on 27 March 1999 and declined to submit rebuttal statements.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPP reviewed this application and recommended denial.  DPP states that the applicant was a member of the IRR and was assigned to the Nonobligated Nonparticipating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS).  In accordance with (IAW) Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 14301, the applicant, while on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL), was deemed eligible for promotion and indeed, the applicant was considered for promotion at the appropriate times.  DPP notes that the applicant was notified of his second deferral for promotion to major and that he would be discharged on his new adjusted mandatory separation date of 1 November 2002.  DPP states that the discharge was executed IAW Title 10, Section 14505 and that the applicant had the opportunity to contact the Promotion Eligibility Division for clarification at any time regarding his consideration before each of the promotion boards he met.

ARPC/DPP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2 May 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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.  The applicant must bear the responsibility for understanding the different facets of his career, including the promotion system of officers on the Reserve Active Status List.  He was notified that he would be meeting both promotion boards yet failed to obtain clarification on the ramifications of such.  Therefore, 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.  Consequently, in the absence of 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 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-2003-01094 in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Mar 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 18 Apr 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair