RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-02047 #3
            INDEX CODE 131.10  131.05
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be  reinstated  to  Regular  component  active  duty  as  if  never
separated  with  all  entitlements  based  on  a   Regular   component
commission at his current Reserve grade of colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Based on his selection for major by Special Selection Board (SSB),  he
should be reinstated to active duty in his current  Reserve  grade  of
colonel.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was a captain (date of rank 23 Apr 82) assigned  to  the
Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI) at McGuire AFB,  NJ.
While on active duty, he was considered in the  promotion  zone  (IPZ)
for major by the Calendar Year 1991A (CY91A) Major  Central  Selection
Board Major board, which convened on 8 Jul 91.  However,  he  was  not
selected.  He elected to separate on 31 Dec 92 under one of  the  AF’s
incentive programs (Special Separation Benefit).

Following separation from active duty, the applicant was  tendered  an
indefinite term of appointment as a Reserve of the Air Force  captain,
which he accepted.

On 25 Jan 95, he was notified that the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force
Inspector General (SAF/IG) had directed the AFOSI to review  promotion
recommendation processes used in  preparing  Promotion  Recommendation
Forms (PRFs) for the CY91A Major board,  among  others.  A  designated
senior rater had been appointed for the review. The resultant PRF  for
the applicant reflected the following:  an essentially  unchanged  job
description, a strongly rewritten promotion  recommendation,  a  group
size of “1” rather than “N/A,” an upgraded overall  recommendation  of
“DP,” and a senior rater who was a colonel and the AFOSI  Director  of
Resources rather than the brigadier general AFOSI commander.

As a result of  the  amended  and  upgraded  PRF,  the  applicant  was
considered IPZ by the CY91A SSB on 31 Jul  95.  However,  he  was  not
selected and was so notified on 29 Sep 95.

In a 6 Feb 96 advisory pertaining to another  applicant,  HQ  USAF/JAG
advised, in part, that the group size “1” indicated on PRFs considered
by SSBs did not reflect the actual group size of the management  level
in which the individual competed at his original promotion board. As a
result, the SSB could possibly be prejudiced by  this  error  and  the
group size should be amended to reflect the original “N/A.”

The applicant submitted an AFBCMR appeal in Sep 98  requesting  direct
promotion to major by the CY91A board, citing in part the  group  size
of his upgraded PRF.  On 6 Sep 00, the Board denied  the  applicant  a
direct promotion to major but did grant him SSB consideration for  the
CY91A board with his PRF reflecting a group size of “N/A” rather  than
“1,” in compliance with the HQ USAF/JAG 1996 opinion. A  copy  of  the
Record of Proceedings for that case is provided at Tab 1.

On 31 Aug 01, the applicant  was  notified  that  the  CY01A  SSB  had
selected him for promotion to major effective and with a date of  rank
of 1 Apr 92. He was advised that, as a result  of  his  selection  for
retroactive promotion, he could request reinstatement to active duty.

On 9 Mar 02, the applicant  was  promoted  to  the  Reserve  grade  of
colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPO advised that the applicant separated from active duty as
a captain on 31 Dec 92. He is currently a Reserve officer holding  the
grade of colonel. There are no provisions  for  the  applicant  to  be
reinstated to active duty in his current Reserve grade. If he  desires
reinstatement based on his promotion through the  SSB,  he  should  be
reinstated in the grade of major. Once returned to  active  duty,  the
applicant will then be eligible to compete for active duty promotions.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant provides background regarding his  earlier  appeal.  For
two reasons, the  Air  Force  compelled  him  to  make  the  unwelcome
decision to  separate.  As  revealed  by  SAF/IG  investigations,  his
command illegally used inappropriate  information  and  procedures  to
determine his PRF recommendation, and  at  the  time,  the  Air  Force
underwent significant personnel downsizing. If he had been promoted in
1991, as he should have been, there is no doubt  that  he  would  have
remained in the active  component  rather  than  transferring  to  the
Reserves. While he cannot state absolutely that  he  would  have  been
promoted to colonel, the Board should consider his successful  Reserve
career, wherein he was promoted to that grade. With continued  service
in the active component and using his Reserve career as an  indicator,
the Air Force would have promoted him on time in  May  or  Jun  97  to
lieutenant colonel over a year earlier than within the Reserve system.
A 10-year old retroactive promotion to major does not fully right  the
wrong done to him.  To  fully  rectify  the  injustice  done  requires
reinstatement into the active component with an active duty commission
in his current grade and an on-time,  IPZ  active  duty  promotion  to
lieutenant colonel.  The  recommendations  of  the  Air  Force  hardly
constitute a just  result  to  circumstances  over  which  he  had  no
control.

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments,  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 error or injustice to warrant  reinstatement  in  the
Regular Air Force in the grade of colonel. Contrary to the Air Force’s
assertion, provisions for granting the applicant’s requests exists  if
the Board recommended  direct  promotion  to  lieutenant  colonel  and
colonel following his reinstatement. However,  while  clear  that  the
applicant would have been selected for  promotion  to  major  had  the
CY91A PRF not been in error and he would have continued his career  in
the Regular Air Force, he has not proven that subsequent promotions to
lieutenant colonel and colonel were guaranteed. His Reserve  promotion
to colonel is acknowledged, but this does not inherently signify  that
the same would have occurred in the Regular Air Force. Neither we, nor
the applicant for that  matter,  can  know  with  certainty  what  the
criteria were for his Reserve promotions and  whether  he  would  have
been competitive for Regular Air Force promotions.  In  this  respect,
the applicant has failed to sustain  his  burden  of  having  suffered
either an error or an injustice  to  the  extent  of  warranting  such
extraordinary  relief.   Therefore,  his   request   for   retroactive
reinstatement on active duty in his Reserve grade of  colonel  is  not
favorably considered.

4.    Notwithstanding the above, we are acutely  aware  of  the  wrong
done the applicant by the flawed  promotion  recommendation  processes
and sympathize with his present circumstances.  We note the  applicant
had 12 years, 8 months and 8  days  of  active  service  when  he  was
discharged on 31 Dec 92 and that he would have had over  20  years  of
service when he was notified on 31 Aug 01 that  he  was  eligible  for
reinstatement. While we do not believe the applicant has made his case
that promotion to lieutenant colonel and colonel were  guaranteed  had
he remained in the Regular Air Force, he should be  aware  that  there
are  other  options  for  relief.  Specifically,  he   could   request
reinstatement in the Regular Air Force and  retirement  in  the  grade
grade of major at the earliest practicable date. The applicant  should
also be aware that if he wished to be reinstated  and  considered  for
promotion beyond major, the Board has  other  options  available  that
would allow him to build a record of performance in the grade of major
before being considered for lieutenant colonel.

5.    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(s)   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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 11 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Billy Baxter, Member
                  Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02047 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 2 Oct 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Dec 02, w/atchs.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chair