RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04082 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be continued in the Air Force Reserve. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was deferred for promotion while assigned to the non- participating Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). After being reassigned to a participating unit, he met his second major promotion board (less than a year later). His record only showed that he completed some Unit Training Assembly’s (UTAs) and his annual tour; however, he used that time to complete the necessary security clearance paperwork and took care of other issues that made his status current. He attempted to be placed on orders that were specific to his job; however, both times the orders were unfunded because of budget constraints. He wishes to be continued in order to prove his potential as a participating member. His complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was discharged from the Air Force Reserve (AFR) on 31 Mar 06. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/PB recommends denial. The applicant was considered and not selected by the CY11 Nonparticipating Reserve Major Promotion Selection Board (W0411A, 31 Jan 11) while he was assigned to the Nonaffiliated Nonparticipating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS), and the CY12 Participating Reserve Major Promotion Selection Board (V0421A, 23 Jan 12). One of the requirements for continuation is that the officer’s primary or duty Air Force Specialty (AFS) had to be manned at less than 85 percent; however, he was not eligible because the 32E3 AFSC was not manned at less than 85 percent. There were no errors in the applicant’s record at the time he was considered for promotion. However, rather than be offered continuation, the applicant’s record could be corrected to allow him to establish a Reserve of the Air Force performance record, which will improve his chances for promotion. The complete PB evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Jan 12 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. 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 Reserve Personnel Center’s 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. While ARPC/PB suggests partial relief by allowing the applicant to establish a performance record which would improve his competiveness for promotion; however, we find no basis to recommend such relief. In this respect, we note that it is more likely than not the reason he was not selected for continuation was because his career field was not undermanned at the time of his second non-selection for promotion, rather than a weak record. Nevertheless, we find no evidence that he has been treated any differently than other officers who are similarly situated. In accordance with 10 USC 14301, all officers on the RASL must be considered for promotion when eligible. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 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-2012-04082 in Executive Session on 4 Apr 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/PB, dated 21 Dec 12. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jan 13.