RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01650 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be promoted to the grade of major (O-4). __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was eligible for promotion to the grade of major on 22 June 2009 based on provisions of Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 1372, even though she was already medically retired. She believes she would have been put in for promotion based upon her position in the unit, completing her Professional Military Education (PME) in residence, and receiving excellent Officer Performance Reports (OPRs), that included her overseas deployment to Iraq. Her commander put her in for State promotion; however, her requests for a copy of her promotion submission have gone unanswered. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides correspondence resulting from her Congressional Inquiry; an excerpt of Title 10 USC, Section 1372; Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) Rating Decisions; and her OPRs. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Pennsylvania Air National Guard (ANG) who became ill during her deployment to Iraq. A medical evaluation revealed she was diagnosed with a complicated connective tissue disease, Systemic Scleroderma with CREST Syndrome. Her condition was determined to be 100 percent disabling; therefore, she was subsequently medically retired in the grade of captain. According to the Pennsylvania Adjutant General’s office memorandum, dated 24 July 2009, in response to the applicant’s Congressional Inquiry, the applicant did meet the minimum time requirements for a unit vacancy promotion; however, her command element did not intend to submit her for an early promotion via the unit vacancy promotion program prior to her medical retirement. The memorandum also indicates that promotion under Title 10, USC, Section 1372, pertains to an officer selected for promotion on a mandatory promotion list, not for an officer eligible for a position vacancy promotion. To invoke Title 10, USC, Section 1372, an officer not only must have met a mandatory promotion board, but also had the promotion approved through Federal recognition granted by the Secretary of the Air Force. __________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: NGB/A1POP recommends denial. A1POP states that in accordance with ANG Instruction 36-2504, paragraph 3.1, “The ANG position vacancy promotion program is designed to provide officers who have demonstrated high potential and exceptional abilities with the opportunity for accelerated promotion. These promotions must be reserved for a very limited number of truly outstanding officers who have demonstrated potential for positions of increased responsibility. Position vacancy promotions are not to be routinely offered to all officers.” Nominees must be recommended for a position vacancy promotion by his/her commander, with commander justification, and the requirement for the officer to be examined and found qualified for promotion by a Federal recognition examining board. Position vacancy promotion is not awarded for past service, but rather is given to those officers who have the potential for future positions of increased responsibility. A1POP indicates that in the applicant’s case, it appears that her commander did not want to submit her for a position vacancy promotion, but rather chose to have her meet a mandatory promotion board when she was eligible. There is no evidence that a Federal recognition promotion board was convened or that a promotion was submitted to their office. The complete A1POP evaluation is at Exhibit B. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 June 2011, for review and comment 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 an error or an 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2011-01650 in Executive Session on 24 January 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01650: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Apr 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1POP, dated 2 Jun 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 11.