RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-03019
            INDEX NUMBER:  131.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His promotion effective date (PED) to the grade of lieutenant  colonel
in the USAF Reserve (USAFR) be changed to 25 May 1996, the date he was
selected for active duty promotion to the same grade.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he was transferred to the USAFR  as  an  individual  mobilization
augmentee (IMA) he was informed by his recruiter and  an  official  at
the HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center (HQ ARPC) that he was not eligible
for his promotion because of his transfer to the Reserve Active Status
List (RASL) from the Active Duty List (ADL), and that he would have to
meet a reserve promotion board.

He states after missing the FY96 promotion board (for not meeting  the
requirements  of  1  year  in  the  USAFR)  and  the  FY97  board  for
administrative reasons [his promotion recommendation  form  (PRF)  did
make it to the board in time], he finally made Lt  Colonel,  effective
18 September 1998.  He further states that based on AFI 36-2504,  para
6.4., he should have received his promotion effective 25 May 1996.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Documentation provided by the applicant indicated that while on active
duty he was selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant  colonel
with a projected date of rank of 25 May 1996.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicated
that he was appointed as a USAFR Medical Corps officer in the grade of
major, on 1 October 1995.  He is currently serving  in  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel, having been promoted to that grade,  effective  18
September 1998.

Applicant’s Officer Performance Report  (OPR)  profile  for  the  last
three reporting periods from 30  June  1996  thru  30  September  1998
reflects all performance factors as meeting standards.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Reserve of the Air Force Selection Board Secretariat, HQ ARPC/DPB,
reviewed this application and recommended denial.  They  indicate  the
applicant was released from active duty and transferred to  the  USAFR
effective  1  October  1995,  prior  to  the  effective  date  of  his
promotion.  According to the law (in effect at the time)  a  promotion
became void if  an  officer  left  their  current  status  before  the
effective date of promotion.  They state  until  the  Reserve  Officer
Personnel  Management  Act  (ROPMA)  was  implemented,  there  was  no
authority to “carry over” a promotion; the officer lost the  promotion
if they left the ADL or the Reserve program  prior  to  the  effective
date.

They further state that the applicant apparently is citing  a  version
of AFI 36-2504, Officer Promotion, Continuation  and  Selective  Early
Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force published after the  enactment
of ROPMA in October 1996, to support his cause.

Their recommendation for denial of the applicant’s request  was  based
on the rationale that the officer was  never  eligible  for  promotion
under the Reserve Officer Promotion Act (ROPA)  and  could  not  apply
under ROPMA until it was implemented on  1 October 1996.   Once  ROPMA
was enacted, the applicant was nominated and considered  and  selected
for Position Vacancy promotion by the  June  1998  Lieutenant  Colonel
Position Vacancy Selection Board.  The applicant was considered by the
earliest possible promotion board.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reiterated his original contentions that  his  promotion
from active duty should carry-over to the USAFR component  because  he
did not have a break in service.  Secondly, he was not considered  for
Unit Vacancy promotion consideration due to administrative  errors  in
processing his PRF.

Additionally, the applicant further explained the  circumstances  with
regards  to  the  administrative  difficulties  he  experienced  which
ultimately led to him not being considered for promotion in June 1997.

Applicant’s 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we do  not  find  his  contentions,  in  and  by  themselves,
sufficiently compelling  to  conclude  that  there  was  an  error  or
injustice.  At the time of his transfer to the USAF  Reserve,  he  did
not meet the  eligibility  requirement  for  promotion  to  lieutenant
colonel under the provisions of  the  Reserve  Officer  Promotion  Act
(ROPA).  He met the eligibility criteria and was  promoted  under  the
first board eligible under the Reserve  Officer  Personnel  Management
Act (ROPMA).  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation
of  the  HQ  Air  Reserve   Personnel   Center   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.  In the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling 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 probable  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 10 April 2001, under the  provisions  of  AFI 36-
2603:

      Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
      Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Nov 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPB, dated 8 Dec 00.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Dec 00.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Jan 01, w/atch.




                                   PEGGY E. GORDON
                                   Panel Chair