RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03415
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be commissioned into the Air Force Reserve Medical Service Corps  (MSC).


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In October 2000, he spoke with a Reserve  Medical  Recruiter  concerning  a
commission as an MSC.  He was informed he would  need  an  additional  five
classes in one of the fields outlined in the policy  letter.   In  December
2000, he was accepted for a position with a  Reserve  Medical  Squadron  at
Portland Oregon.  In April 2001, he received a letter of denial stating  he
did not have the correct undergraduate or  graduate  degree.   He  did  not
understand since he had complied with the education instruction that he was
given.  He later was informed that he was denied a commission  not  on  the
basis of an improper degree, but rather than the classes he submitted  were
not acceptable.  Although the news was disappointing, he took the necessary
classes to fulfill the education  requirements.   However,  after  checking
with some units and talking with the medical  recruiter,  he  was  informed
that all commissioning in the MSC field had been frozen.

He would like the Board to consider his circumstances  and  the  supporting
documents.  The policy letters were lacking pertinent information.  He lost
the slot in Portland since so  much  time  had  elapsed  and  finally  upon
meeting education requirements, he was informed all  commissioning  in  the
MSC field had been frozen.  He would like to be granted  permission  to  be
commissioned and assigned as an overage if he is unable to find a  vacancy.


In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement,  a  copy
of the Educational Requirements  for  Appointments  as  a  Medical  Service
Officer (MSC) in the Air Force Reserve dated 20 May 1999, 30 November  2000
and 4 June 2001; a copy of his denial letter and copy of his  Congressional
letter.  The applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Military Personnel Database (MilPDS) indicates the  applicant,  an  Air
Force Reserve member, is currently serving in the grade of master  sergeant
with a date of rank and effective date of 1 September 1999.  As of 2  March
2005, applicant has been credited with 21 years and 11 days of satisfactory
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPZ recommends the application be denied.  DPZ states that  given  the
Air Force Reserve Medical Service Corps is currently manned  in  excess  of
100 percent; a conscious decision by the USAFR senior leadership is to  not
commission any MSC officers until such time as there are valid vacancies to
support such action.  DPZ further states that  there  are  ongoing  efforts
within the command to work toward opening the commissioning of MSCs  within
the next year or so.  At that time, the applicant  as  well  as  all  other
qualified candidates will be able to make application for commissioning  as
a MSC officer.  However, AFRC/DPZ states that if the decision is  to  grant
the relief requested, the records should be  corrected  to  show  that  the
applicant was commissioned as an MSC officer and authorized to be  assigned
as an overage to an Air Force Reserve medical organization.   The  AFRC/DPZ
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 28 January 2005, a copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  sent  to  the
applicant for review and comment.  As of this date,  this  office  has  not
received a 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.  Evidence has  not  been  provided  which
would lead us to believe that the denial of  the  applicant’s  application
for a commission in the Air Force Reserve Medical Service Corps (MSC)  was
erroneous or inequitable.  We noted the applicant’s  assertions  that  the
lack of pertinent information on the policy letters and the time  required
to finally meet the educational requirements for his commission  into  the
MSC were factors that led  to  his  inability  to  procure  a  commission.
However, we have seen no  evidence  indicating  that  the  denial  of  his
application for entry into the Air Force Reserve MSC Corps was contrary to
the provisions of the governing  Air  Force  regulation  or  that  he  was
treated differently than similarly situated applicants.   After  reviewing
the evidence provided, we agree with  the  Air  Force  Reserve  assessment
concerning this matter and adopt their rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has not been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  Other than his own assertions, the applicant has  provided  no
persuasive evidence indicating his substantial rights were  violated,  the
deciding authorities abused their discretionary authority, or the decision
to deny his request was based on factors other than the best interests  of
the Air Force.  Accordingly, the  applicant’s  request  is  not  favorably
considered.

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 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 9 March 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
              Ms. Ann-Cecile M. McDermott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-03415.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Oct 04, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, AFRC/DPZ, dated 24 Jan 05.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jan 05.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair