RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03456

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His two-time non-selection for promotion status be rescinded.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like to serve his country in the Air National Guard dental corps.  He assumed the reason he was not promoted was that he was not called back to 
active duty.  He had no clue that being passed over for promotion in the Individual Ready Reserves (IRR) would totally prohibit him from ever serving his 
country as a dental officer in the Armed Forces.  He was never informed of any requirements that he had to perform to be promoted in the IRR.  

The applicant did not submit any additional documentation in support of his request.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), the applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force 
who served from 16 August 2004, through 15 August 2007.  He was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service and a narrative 
reason of separation of “Completion of Required Active Service.”  

The applicant received a memorandum from ARPC/DPTT informing him that because of his second deferral for promotion he must be discharged upon completion of 
his military service obligation.  His mandatory separation date was reflected as 9 June 2012.  Since he did not qualify for transfer to the Retired Reserve, a 
special order announcing his discharge and an honorable 
discharge certificate would be sent to him when the discharge 
action was taken.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force at Exhibit C.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  ARPC/PB recommends denial.  ARPC/PB states there were no 
errors in the applicant’s record as it met both boards.  He was 
discharged in accordance with (IAW) current laws and 
regulations.  The applicant has provided no evidence that the 
board’s recommendations were in any way unfair or unjust.  The 
applicant was considered, but not selected, by the calendar year 
(CY) CY10 and CY11 Nonparticipating Reserve Major Promotion 
Selection Boards, which convened at HQ ARPC on 4 February 2010, 
and 31 January 2011, respectively.  When considered by these 
boards, he was assigned to the Non-obligated Non-participating 
Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS).  The promotion quota for 
Nonparticipating Reserve Promotion Boards is one (1).  Although 
members in this Reserve section are not in a participating 
status, IAW Title 10 USC, Section 14301, all officers on the 
Reserve Active Status List (RASL) must be considered for 
promotion when eligible.  

2.  A review of the applicant's Officer Selection Record (OSR) 
did not reveal any errors in the record at the time it was 
reviewed by each board.  No information was provided to either 
promotion board that would identify this member, or any other 
meeting the board, as in-the-promotion-zone or above-the-
promotion-zone.  Board members use the “whole person concept” in 
reviewing the entire Officer Selection Record.  The board 
considers job performance, as documented on OPRs, participation, 
professional qualities, job responsibility, leadership, specific 
achievements, decorations, and education.  A promotion board is 
the sole recommending authority, and no feedback is provided by 
the board to explain why a member is not recommended for 
selection to the next higher grade.  

The complete ARPC/PB 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 30 August 2013, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  To date, a 
response has not been received.  
________________________________________________________________

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 (OPR) 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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 this application in Executive Session on 11 March 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
			, Member
			, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03456 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 July 2013.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/PB, dated 19 August 2013.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 August 2013.
1 2