RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03739
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

      MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 10 Jun 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His retired grade be upgraded from lieutenant colonel (0-5) to  colonel  (0-
6).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He  was  retired  from  active  duty  from  an  Active  Guard/Reserve  (AGR)
assignment on 1 Sep 05 after waiting almost three years for a 0-6  position.
 He was selected for promotion by the FY 2003 Colonel Medical Service  Corps
(MSC) Board.  After notification of his  selection  for  promotion,  he  was
told he would have to find a MSC position and would not be able  to  fill  a
line position.  He was told  by  the  AGR  Management  Office  (REAMO)  that
although the AGR program was a career  program  AFR/CC  controlled  all  0-6
positions.  Applicant provided examples of how other  officers  were  placed
into 0-6 positions and adds that he would have  reverted  back  to  being  a
line officer if he knew there would be a problem.   He  filed  an  Inspector
General (IG)  complaint  which  was  not  pursued  and  given  to  AF/RE  to
investigate.  He was told that RE could promote or not promote whoever  they
wanted.  Ironically, he was told, in a letter  dated  five  days  after  his
retirement he could compete for a line position.   Applicant  believes  that
the active duty instruction  which  was  intended  to  give  flexibility  to
commanders in placing colonels was incorrectly  applied  in  his  situation.
On  active  duty,  officers  selected  for  promotion  will  eventually  get
promoted.  The assignment was up to the commander.  In his case as  an  AGR,
by applying the same instruction, it allows the Air Force Reserve  Commander
to usurp the promotion board's authority and keep people  from  wearing  the
promotion they have earned.

Although there would be few opportunities for an MSC 0-6  slot,  there  were
people retained and brought on board that required  waivers.   The  position
of ARPC/SG which had been an AGR 0-6 position was flipped  with  the  Deputy
SG position (an active duty 0-5).  Although he was told he could  only  fill
a "medical" position, he had been working as a  line  officer  for  most  of
over six years as an AGR.  He volunteered for every  0-6  position  and  has
volunteered to go anywhere  to  serve.   He  has  been  criticized  for  not
working as an MSC yet also told that he cannot fill  a  line  position.   He
deployed to  Iraq  and  served  as  an  MSC  as  the  Deputy  Commander  and
Administrator.  He sent an email to the new AFRC Commander asking for  help.
 He was told that  the  AFRC/CV  said  "I  would  not  be  management  moved
anywhere that if a vacancy opened I would get serious consideration [sic]."

All AGR announcements contain the phrase "current AF Reserve  AGRs  will  be
given priority consideration."  A change to the AGR  Management  Instruction
states in bold "COMMANDERS AND OTHER HIRING AUTHORITIES WILL FIRST  CONSIDER
ELIGIBLE AND QUALIFIED  AGRS  TO  FILL  VACANCIES."   He  called  REAMO  for
clarification of the statement and was told it did not really apply  to  0-6
positions.

In support of his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,  a
congratulatory letter, a Vacancy Announcement,  his  complaint  response,  a
Statement  of  Understanding,  and  his  retirement  order.   His   complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the Personnel Data System reflects he initially  entered
military service on 28 Sep 78.  He was appointed a second lieutenant  on  25
Jul 86.  He has been progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  lieutenant
colonel having assumed that grade effective and with a date  of  rank  or  1
Sep 99.  He was selected for promotion  to  the  grade  of  colonel  by  the
Fiscal Year 2003 Air Force Reserve Colonel Medical Service  Corps  Promotion
Board.  While serving as an AGR member in the  Air  Force  Reserves  he  was
retired on 1 Sep 05.  He was credited with 26 years, 11 months, and  3  days
of service.  He completed 21 years, 5months, and 6 days of  active  military
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

USAF/REAMO recommends denial.  REAMO states as  an  AGR  and  in  accordance
with AFI 36-2504, AGRs who are  promoted  to  the  next  higher  grade  must
occupy a position in that higher grade  before  a  promotion  order  can  be
published and the member can pin-on the higher rank.  At  the  time  of  his
selection he occupied a 0-5 position in a special duty assignment as  Chief,
Operations and Training, Directorate of  Recruiting  Services,  Headquarters
AFRC.  He applied for at least eight positions  in  the  AGR  program.   Air
Force Reserve leadership  reserves  the  right  to  determine  how  to  fill
leadership billets with the best-qualified members from across the  command.
 While AGRs are afforded priority consideration, an AGR may not be the best-
qualified candidate to  fill  a  specific  requirement.   The  nominees  are
forwarded to the selecting official and it is  the  selecting  official  who
determines which nominee is the right fit for the position.   The  applicant
sites several situations where members  were  placed  in  0-6  positions  or
positions were "found" for an  0-6  select.   In  each  case,  the  position
description was validated by HQ AFRC  or  AF-RE  manpower  directorates  and
upgraded to the higher grade due to added  and  increased  responsibilities.
He alleges "all personnelists find themselves in 0-6 position."    A  review
of the colonel AGR positions currently authorized for the  AGR  program  for
the Health Services Utilization (41AX) and Personnel Officer  (36PX)  career
fields is 4 positions for the 41AX Specialty and 22 positions for  the  36PX
Specialty codes.

When he  was  selected  for  promotion  in  1999  he  was  assigned  to  the
recruiting directorate  and  held  recruiting  AFSC  83R0.   All  Air  Force
members are eligible to apply  for  recruiting  positions.   The  recruiting
career  field  is  a  Special  Duty  Assignment  and  did  not  change   the
competitive category in which he was considered.   Also,  remaining  in  the
recruiting career field for a lengthy period of time took  him  out  of  the
MSC career field, which made him less competitive in that career field  when
vacancies occurred.  Although he deployed in  the  MSC  career  field,  this
experience was a small timeframe compared to the six years he  was  assigned
AFR recruiting duties.  He was eligible to fill a "Line of  the  Air  Force"
position, if selected, and approved  for  a  competitive  category  transfer
from MSC to the Line category.

The REAMO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant notes that REAMO is the same office that  disagreed  with  his  IG
complaint and was responsible  for  managing  AGR  positions.  He  finds  it
unfair the author should be the one responding to his case.  The  evaluation
does not address one of the key issues,  the  fact  that  according  to  the
vacancy announcements,  "current  Air  Force  Reserve  AGRs  will  be  given
priority consideration.  Applicant states that in fact, he was the only  AGR
applying for most of the positions for which he was not selected.  By  their
own admission not only was he  not  given  priority  consideration  but  was
viewed with prejudice.  Applicant takes  issue  with  the  insinuation  that
since he was in Recruiting for over six years it made him  less  of  an  MSC
and in-turn, not qualified to hold a 0-6 MSC  position.   Most  of  the  0-6
positions he applied for were at headquarters level;  they  require  someone
with more staffing and  leadership  skill;  skills  that  he  as  proven  to
possess.  During his deployment he proved his abilities as an  MSC  working,
on average, 14-16 hours a day, seven days a week, with no day off  for  over
100 days and under hostile conditions.  The written evaluation  he  received
speaks for itself.

He was told from almost the first day after learning of his selection for 0-
6 that he could not compete for  line  positions.   This  came  through  his
commander, AF/RE, and AFR/CV.   It  was  not  until  after  he  retired  and
received an answer to his IG complaint that he was told that he  could  have
competed for a line position.

His complete 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 an error or  injustice.   Applicant  requests  his  records  be
corrected to reflect he was retired in the grade  of  colonel,  rather  than
lieutenant colonel.  His request is based in part on the fact  that  he  was
selected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the FY03  Reserve  Colonel
Selection Board, but was not given appropriate consideration  for  placement
into an 0-6 position prior to his retirement.  After a  thorough  review  of
the available evidence of record and the applicant's submission, we are  not
persuaded that corrective action is warranted in this  case.   In  cases  of
this nature, we are not inclined to usurp  the  discretionary  authority  of
Air Force officials absent evidence of abuse of that authority.  We are  not
persuaded by  the  evidence  presented  that  inappropriate  standards  were
applied  in  this  case  or  that  he  was   not   given   the   appropriate
considerations.  The applicant's contention that he was not  given  priority
consideration in his endeavor  to  fill  an  0-6  position  is  duly  noted.
However, it  is  our  opinion  that  Air  Force  officials  responsible  for
selecting individuals for  senior  leadership  positions  are  in  the  best
position to determine which nominees  are  the  best  qualified  candidates.
Unfortunately, selection for promotion  by  a  Reserve  selection  board  in
itself, does not guarantee  selection  for  an  0-6  position  nor  does  it
obligate selecting officials to provide him priority placement.   Therefore,
in  the  absence  of  persuasive  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief   sought   in   this
application.

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 issues 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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2005-
03739 in Executive Session on 16 Mar 06, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
      Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, USAF/REAMO, dated 30 Jan 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Feb 06.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair