RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01101
            INDEX CODE:

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Regular Air Force (RegAF) appointment be reinstated.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has volunteered to return to active duty after serving in  the  Air
Force Reserve.  Prior to serving in the Reserve he was on active  duty
where he received a Regular Air Force commission.   He  is  requesting
his Regular commission be restored so that he may serve on active duty
beyond the 20-year point that is the limit  for  Reserve  commissioned
officers.

The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214  in  support  of  the
appeal.   Applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachment  is  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data  System  indicates  that
the applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve  of  the  Air
Force on 30 April 1988.  He was voluntarily ordered to extended active
duty in that grade on 2 October 1988.  He was subsequently  integrated
into the Regular Air Force and was progressively promoted to the grade
of captain, effective and with a date of rank of 16 July 1992.   Based
on his tendered  resignation,  on  7  July  1999,  the  applicant  was
honorably discharged from the Regular Air Force under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-3207, Completion of Required  Service.   He  had  served  10
Years, 9 months and 6 days  on  active  duty.   On  8 July  1999,  the
applicant was appointed a captain, Air Force Reserve, and was assigned
to an active Reserve position.  He was promoted to the grade of major,
effective and with a date of rank  of  1  October  2000.   As  of  the
Retirement Year Ending 29 April 2003, he was credited with 15 years of
satisfactory Federal service.

The applicant entered active duty under  the  Voluntary  Rated  Recall
Program on 19 November 2003 in the grade of major with a date of  rank
of 1 October 2000.   Based  on  his  break  in  extended  active  duty
service, his Total Active Federal Commissioned Service  Date  (TAFCSD)
was adjusted to 27 December 1989.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPOO states the applicant’s in-the-promotion-zone consideration
for lieutenant colonel is tentatively scheduled for sometime in  2005.
If selected for lieutenant colonel, the applicant will  be  offered  a
RegAF appointment at that time.  If the applicant  is  nonselected  he
will be considered again for lieutenant colonel (above the zone) by  a
board tentatively scheduled to convene in 2006.  If the  applicant  is
nonselected twice for promotion to lieutenant colonel he will have the
opportunity to be continued to 20 years  of  active  military  service
and, at a later board, possibly continued  up  to  his  24th  year  of
active  commissioned  service.   Since  the  applicant  will  have  an
opportunity to be offered a RegAF appointment  prior  to  reaching  20
years of military service or be selectively continued on  active  duty
to retirement or possibly up to his 24th year of  active  commissioned
service, they  do  not  believe  the  applicant’s  request  should  be
granted.   In  addition,  they  do  not  believe  in  this  particular
situation it would be fair or equitable  to  his  peers,  who  entered
active duty under a Voluntary Recall Program, to grant the applicant’s
request for  a  RegAF  appointment  at  this  time.   Therefore,  they
recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 14 May 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice warranting reinstating his Regular
Air  Force  (RegAF)  appointment.   The  Air  Force  states  that  the
applicant will be eligible to meet his lieutenant colonel board  prior
to reaching  20  years  of  active  military  service;  therefore,  if
selected for lieutenant colonel he will be offered a RegAF appointment
at that time.  If he is nonselected twice for promotion to  lieutenant
colonel he will have the opportunity to be continued to  20  years  of
active military service and at a later board possibly continued up  to
his 24th year of active commissioned service.  In view  of  the  above
and in the absence of evidence by  the  applicant  indicating  he  was
treated differently from other similarly situated officers,  we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and  adopt  their
rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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 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 23 June 2004, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                       Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member
                       Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 04, w/atch.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPOO, dated 11 May 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 May 04.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Chair