RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02539
		INDEX CODE:  131.01

	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reinstated to active reserve status for a period of not less than one and not greater than seven years so the promotion board action is not wasted.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was promoted in this time of war to meet the needs of the US Air Force Reserve for experienced senior level officers.  The Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs’(SAF/MR) denial of continuation in the Air Force Reserve constituted an injustice to the FY04 Promotion Board, the USAFR, and him as his promotion attested to his ability, performance and future potential in the Air Force Reserve.  The Assistant Secretary erred grievously in failing to recognize this.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his Promotion Recommendation Form for the V0604A promotion board; his Reserve Promotion order to Colonel, effective 1 Mar 04; a copy of an Officer Performance Report, closing 11 Apr 03 and an Individual Information Report, dated 24 Nov 03; letters of congratulation, and a copy of a USAFR Extension of Colonels on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) package and the denial letter from SAF/MR, dated 28 May 04.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, a Reserve Officer, is currently retired awaiting pay at age 60.  He was reassigned to the Retired Reserve effective 1 June 200X.

Based on available evidence, applicant was commissioned on 10 May 1974.  His mandatory separation date (MSD) was established as 9 June 2002, based on 28 years and 30 days of service.  Applicant met and was selected for continuation in July 2001; he accepted continuation and his MSD was adjusted to 31 May 2004.  He was promoted to the grade of colonel, with a promotion service date and date of rank of 1 Mar 04, as a Supply officer.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPP reviewed this application and recommended denial.  Applicant was promoted to colonel effective 1 March 2004.  Officers promoted under the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) must serve satisfactory in grade for three years, in order to retire in that grade.  Time in grade requirement is reduced to six months if the officer is involuntarily separated from active status due to age or years of service.  Applicant falls under the involuntarily separation policy due to his MSD; therefore, he only needed six months of satisfactory service to retire in the grade of colonel.  Since applicant’s MSD was 31 May 2004, he did not meet the six months requirement.

A request was prepared from Chief of the Air Force Reserve (AF/RE) to SAF/MR for an extension to the MSD, pending a long-term policy change to continuation.  On 26 May 2004, SAF/MR denied the request.  Applicant was properly transferred to the Retired Reserve on 31 May 2004.  There are no other provisions in the law to extend the applicant’s MSD; therefore, his retirement should stand.

A complete copy of the 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 24 Sep 04 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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  The applicant argues he was promoted during this time of war to meet the needs of the Air Force Reserve for experienced colonels and the denial of his exception to policy waiver to be extended beyond his mandatory separation date (MSD) creates an injustice for the FY04 Colonel promotion board.  He was considered and selected for continuation in June 01; he accepted continuation and his MSD was adjusted to 31 May 04 (30 years and 30 days).  After careful review of the evidence provided, we found evidence the applicant’s established MSD was based on the governing instruction and policy in effect at the time, using the same policies governing others who were similarly situated.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive 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 issues 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-2004-02539 in Executive Session on 7 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 04, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPP, dated 21 Sep 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Sep 04.