RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02489
		INDEX CODE:  131.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the earliest SSB in-lieu-of the FY05 Line and NonLine Lt Colonel Position Vacancy Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was nominated for promotion by her commander and an appropriately written PRF was forwarded to ARPC for consideration at the FY05 board without knowledge of the error in authorized grade.  She was incorrectly assigned to a position number with an authorized grade of 0-4.  Her commander supports this nomination and the error is being corrected in order to allow her to be considered for promotion at the earliest SSB.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the e-mail communication and a copy of her PRF.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of major.

The applicant’s nomination package, AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation (PRF), when received at ARPC on 30 April 2004, did not contain a recommended position number.  Once researched, the applicant was found to occupy a major’s position according to MilPDS and the Reserve Management Vacancy System (RMVS) - Manpower/Personnel Position Information.

A position number and reassignment of the applicant to a higher graded position was requested by e-mail communication from ARPC to 374 MSS/DPMR, Yokota AB, Japan.  Assorted e-mail traffic within PACAF indicates obtaining an authorized higher graded position number and reassigning the applicant to a higher graded position was not accomplished.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB states as of 25 August 2004, MilPDS indicated the applicant was assigned to a higher graded position.  However, verification with Reserve Management Vacancy System showed the position does not exist.  An officer cannot be assigned against a position that is not funded or authorized.  It is possible for an officer to be eligible to be assigned to a higher graded position, but a position does not exist.  The applicant is not and was not, at the time of the selection board, eligible for promotion consideration.  Before the board, during the board and now after public release of the board results, the applicant does not occupy a valid higher graded position.  There is no eligibility for position vacancy promotion because no vacancy exists.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 3 September 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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 2 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 04, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 30 Aug 04, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 04.