RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01368
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His original date of discharge from the Air Force Reserve be corrected to 26 May 2003 to match the Reserve Obligation Termination Date on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 25 Jun 00 release from active duty. 

2.  His Date of Rank (DOR) be recalculated to account for an inactive period between 27 May 2003 and 14 September 2003.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since his original Reserve discharge date was incorrect, his DOR was not calculated correctly when he applied for an assignment to a Reserve detachment in Sep 03.  This error subsequently led to his consideration for an Air Force Reserve Major Selection Board.  

He should not have been considered for promotion to major because of the incorrect DOR.  Had his DOR been properly calculated, he would have been outside the eligibility window.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 May 95, the applicant was appointed as a Reserve officer and was called to active duty, on 26 June 1995.  On 25 Jun 00, he was released from active duty and transferred to the Obligated Reserve Section (ORS) to complete his Military Service Obligation (MSO).  On 26 May 03, he was transferred to the Non-obligated Nonparticipating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS). On 30 Sep 03, he was assigned to an Air Force Reserve Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) position.

The applicant met a mandatory major promotion board in 2005 and 2006.  He was nonselected for promotion by both boards and his Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) was established as l Nov 06.

On 1 Nov 06, the applicant was discharged from all appointments.

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPTT recommends denial.  The law and the AFI states that the appointment for a reserve officer is indefinite and officers are not automatically discharged when their MSOs expire.  

In accordance with (IAW) Title 10, United States Code, Section 12203(c), Appointments of Reserve in commissioned grades are for an indefinite term.  Also, AFI 36-2005, Appointment in Commissioned Grades and Designation and Assignment in Professional Categories - Reserve of the Air Force and United States Air Force, states in Chapter 1, paragraph 1.3 Appointment Duration, all Reserve Air Force appointments are for an indefinite term.  When his MSO expired on 26 May 03, he was transferred to NNRPS.  He was then assigned to an IMA position.  Based on his DOR of 26 Jun 99, he met two mandatory major promotion boards in 2005 and 2006 and was not selected for promotion to major by either board.  

The complete DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant disputes three pieces of the analysis provided in the Air Force evaluation:

a.  In paragraph 3.b, DPTT states that his appointment to the Air Force Reserve had an indefinite term; however, he contends that when he separated from active duty, his DD Form 214 had a Reserve Obligation Termination Date of 26 May 03, which is not indefinite and requests retroactive enforcement of that date.

b.  In paragraph 3.c, DPTT states that he was transferred to the NNRPS; however, while this may have occurred, he was never given a copy of those orders and none were provided by DPTT.  If he had known this occurred, he would have investigated his options in 2003.

c.  In paragraph 4, DPTT incorrectly assumes that he wants to erase his entire service history after his MSO; however, in actuality, he wants to enforce his Reserve Obligation Termination Date and then restart his service effective on the date he joined the National Security Agency (NSA) Reserve unit in Sep 03.

This request is important because the near 100 days between his Reserve Obligation Termination Date (May 2003) and the date he joined a reserve unit (September 2003) increased his time in grade which made him pre-maturely eligible for a promotion board.

Rather than following the solution outlined by DPTT in paragraph 4, which involves him losing credit for all service after his MSO date, he proposes placing him in the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) effective 27 May 2003.  This action would cause a break in service.  Subsequently establishing an appointment date of 15 Sep 03 and would result in an adjustment in his DOR from 26 Jun 99 to 14 Oct 99.

He requests the opportunity to appear at the board to explain his position.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

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.  While the applicant believes his DOS should be changed to match his MSO, he has not provided substantial evidence to warrant disturbing the record.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the OPR 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.  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.

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 involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-01368 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Mar 13, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Record.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPTT, dated 5 Apr 13, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 13.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Apr 13.




                                   Panel Chair