RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2003-03692
		INDEX CODE 110.01  131.00
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His retirement date of 1 Feb 98 be extended at least four more years so he would have 20 years of commissioned service, and that he be considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was ordered to retire with 15 years, 5 months and 20 days of active commissioned service, which constitutes grave error and injustice. The “high tenure” for major is 20 years of active commissioned service. His enlisted active service should not have been considered so that he could serve for at least four more years, during which time he would have been promoted and continued to serve for a full 30 years. Through no fault of his own, the Air Force retired him involuntarily and prematurely. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant had prior Regular and Reserve enlisted service. Based on his 17 Dec 82 Statement of Service, his Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS) date is 25 Oct 77 and his Total Active Federal Commission Service (TAFCS) date is 13 Sep 81. 

The applicant was considered but not selected for promotion to the grade of LTC by the Calendar Year 1996A (CY96A) and the CY97B LTC selection boards.

He retired in the grade of major on 1 Feb 98 with 20 years, 3 months and 7 days of total active service.

Through AFBCMR action on 6 Apr 99, the applicant was considered by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY97B LTC board on 10 Jan 00; however, he was not selected.  

He then submitted a new Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) with an upgraded promotion recommendation and was administratively granted SSB consideration for the CY97B board, but again was not selected. 

Through a second AFBCMR action on 14 May 02, the applicant was considered, but not selected, by SSB for the CY96A LTC board on 12 Nov 02. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRRP notes AFI 36-3203 states the mandatory retirement of a Regular major is no later than the first day of the seventh calendar month after the month in which the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) or designee approves the board report when the officer has twice failed selection for promotion when eligible for retirement under any law.  Under Title 10, USC, Section 637, a selection board may continue a major that has been twice nonselected for LTC, subject to the needs of the service. If selected for continuation, a major is subject to discharge or retirement on the last day of the month in which he completes 24 years of active commissioned service, unless he is promoted to the Regular grade of LTC.  Title 10, USC, Section 632(a)(3) permits a major to be retained to complete 20 years TAFMS if he has twice failed selection to LTC.  Title 10, USC, Section 8911, states that Regular commissioned officers are eligible to retire if they have 20 years TAFMS, and only 10 of those years need be active service as a commissioned officer. The applicant was mandatorily retired because he was twice nonselected for LTC and was not selected for continuation. The SSB reaffirmed his nonselection for promotion. There is no “high tenure” for an officer. The applicant had over 20 years of TAFMS, of which over 10 years were TAFCS.  Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPO reiterates the governing directives cited by HQ AFPC/DPPRRP. Continuation of an officer and the period of continuation on active duty are subject to the approval of the SAF. For the CY97B board, all Reserve and Regular majors in the Chaplain Corps were continued until the last day of the month in which they became retirement eligible for normal 20-year retirement. All chaplains who were retirement eligible as of the mandatory date of separation (DOS) (last day of the sixth month after approval of the board report) were required to retire no later than the mandatory DOS. Since the board results were approved on 9 Jul 97, the mandatory DOS was established as 31 Jan 98. With the exception of Catholic chaplains, no chaplains have been continued past 20 years of total active military service/retirement eligibility. Approving this request would give the applicant an entitlement his peers did not receive; therefore, denial is recommended.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 Feb 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded his retirement date should be extended and he be considered for promotion to LTC. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to circumvent the requirements of statute and the rationale provided by the Air Force. The applicant was twice passed over for LTC, was not selected for continuation, and had over 20 years of TAFMS and 10 years of TAFCS. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has not sustained his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

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 this application in Executive Session on 7 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03692 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 21 Nov 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 18 Feb 04.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Feb 04.