RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01787
		INDEX CODE:  135.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His status be changed from non-select reserve status to select reserve status.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had been going through the process of rejoining the Air Force Reserve (AFRES) and had found a position when he found out that he had been passed over for promotion for the second time.  Due to the inordinate amount of time it has taken for him to be accessed, he is now facing mandatory separation.

In support of his appeal, applicant has provided a personal statement, application to AFPC/DPB to explore the possibility of having his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for the FY03 Health Professions Major Selection Board corrected, and several pertinent emails between himself, his Health Professions Recruiter and ARPC.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant separated from active duty, as a captain, on 30 August 1999.  During Spring 2003, he applied for transfer from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) to the active selective reserve program.  While his application was being processed he was passed over by the FY02 and FY03 Major Selection Boards. His record indicates he was subjected to mandatory separation effective 1 October 2003. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/SG reviewed this application and recommended denial.  SG notes that the issue of untimely processing being to blame for the applicant being passed over twice before being able to rejoin the AFRES is beyond the purview their office.  However, an SG postscript reveals that ARPC/SGE is currently manned in the applicant’s medical specialty at 117%.

ARPC/SG’s 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 20 June 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 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.  We noted his assertions of delay in processing his physical and background check paperwork but unfortunately he did not include any documentation to corroborate his claim that the time taken to process his application was excessive.  However, should he choose to submit supporting statements substantiating an inordinate delay in the processing of his paperwork, the Board would reconsider his application.  Therefore, 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-2003-01787 in Executive Session on 3 February 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 May 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/SG, dated 12 Jun 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jun 03.