SECOND ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-1991-01818

		COUNSEL:  NO
		
		HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Reconsideration of Board’s previous decision for his Officer 
Effectiveness Report (OER) closing 17 Apr 87 be declared void 
and removed from his records.  

2.  His Officer Selection Records (OSR) considered by the 1986, 
1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991 Lieutenant Colonel (O-5) 
Promotion Boards be corrected to reflect he was awarded the 
Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), effective 8 Sep 86, and that he 
completed the Air War College (AWC), effective 15 Sep 86.  

3.  His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from 
Active Duty, be corrected to reflect he was awarded the MSM, 
First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC) for the period 17 May 86 to 31 Aug 
91.  

4.  His duty title of Director of Family Support Center be 
voided from his records for the period 1987 through 1988.  

5.  Based on these corrections, he be granted Special Selection 
Board (SSB) promotion consideration to the grade of lieutenant 
colonel (05).  

________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

On 30 Nov 93, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s 
original request to correct his records to reflect his Officer 
Effectiveness Reports (OER) closing 17 Apr 86, 17 Apr 87, and 
17 Apr 88 be declared void and removed, his non-selection for 
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel be set aside, he be 
retroactively promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel, he be 
reinstated to active duty in the grade of lieutenant colonel, 
and any derogatory/unfavorable information contained in his 
records be deleted.  In the original case, the applicant 
contended his OERs closing 17 Apr 86, 17 Apr 87, and 17 Apr 88 
adversely effected his promotion consideration to the grade of 
lieutenant colonel.  As such, the OERs should be declared void 
and removed and, based on these corrections, he should be given 
SSB consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant 
colonel.  The Board found the evidence presented by the 
applicant was not sufficient to conclude that he was somehow not 
fairly considered for promotion on a fair and equitable basis.  
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the 
applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier 
decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at 
Exhibit H.  

On 11 Oct 06, by virtue of a DD Form 149, the applicant 
requested reconsideration of his requests to remove his OER 
closing 17 Apr 87 from his records and receive SSB promotion 
consideration.  As the applicant’s request on this point did not 
contain any new and/or relevant evidence, the Board staff 
determined his request for reconsideration did not meet the 
criteria for reconsideration by the Board.  In addition, the 
applicant requested that his duty title of Commander, 
Headquarters Squadron Section be voided from his record and he 
be provided SSB consideration for promotion to the grade of 
lieutenant colonel.  However, after a thorough review of the 
documentation provided by the applicant on this point, the Board 
determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or 
injustice and denied the applicant’s request.  For an accounting 
of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s 
reconsideration and the rationale of the Board’s decision, see 
the Addendum to Record of Proceedings (AROP) at Exhibit O. 

On 19 Jul 13, by virtue of a letter through the applicant’s 
Senator, he requested reconsideration of his request to remove 
his 1987 OER from his records and be provided SSB consideration, 
contending there were clearly unlawful evaluation practices 
which adversely and inaccurately portrayed his official records 
and quality of his service to the United States.  As new 
evidence, the applicant submitted a copy of the Senate Report 
102-482, a 27 Jun 94 memorandum, entitled “Retirement of Major 
General Thomas J. Hickey, U.S. Air Force,” and a 29 Jun 94 
memorandum, entitled “Whether an Attempt to Influence a Major-
General Selection Board Could Conceivably Be Subject To Criminal 
Prosecution.”  He argues these documents substantiate the 
integrity of his promotion process was flawed.  Specifically, 
officers were excluded from promotion consideration by a pre-
selection process that communicated a “priority list” to 
selection boards.  He contends these documents further revealed 
non-transparent Air Force practices that violated officer 
promotion statutes, regulations and evaluation procedures led by 
the top Air force personnel officer, which in-turn affected the 
applicant.  As for the applicant’s request that his OSR be 
corrected to reflect he was awarded the MSM and attended AWC, he 
argues that he completed AWC on 5 Sep 86 and the AWC entry was 
intentionally removed from his records reviewed by the 
lieutenant colonel promotion selection boards held during 1987 
through 1991.  As such, he should receive SSB consideration for 
the boards held during 1987 through 1991.  In regards to his MSM 
awarded on 8 Sep 86, there was an untimely, inordinate record 
entry delay causing it not to be reflected in his records until 
1987.  Thus, his record before the contested promotion boards 
was inaccurate.  The Air Force Military Personnel Center (AFMPC) 
approved the removal of his duty title, “Director of Family 
Support Center” in March 1987; however, a delay in its removal 
until 17 Mar 88 caused his OSR that met the 15 Jun 87 SSB and 
another 1987 regular promotion selection board held on 25 Nov 87 
to be inaccurate.  His OER closing 17 Apr 87, erroneously cites 
three duties held and evaluated, while only two were valid.  It 
was factually incorrect to cite three duties in the OER when 
AFMPC removed the civilian Director, Family Support Center duty.  
Finally, his MSM (First Oak Leaf Cluster) awarded 31 Aug 91 was 
not reflected on his DD Form 214 at retirement.   

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit P.  
________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing the applicant’s request and the totality 
of the evidence provided, we are not convinced that the evidence 
presented by the applicant in support of his request for 
reconsideration of the Board’s previous decisions meets the 
criteria for reconsideration.  In this respect, we note the 
applicant has provided copies of a variety of congressional and 
other reports intended to impugn the Air Force’s officer 
promotion process; however, in view of the fact that these 
reports are not new, but were reasonably available during 
previous considerations of the applicant’s case, we are not 
convinced that the documentation provided by the applicant meets 
the criteria for reconsideration.  As the applicant has been 
advised, reconsideration is only authorized when an applicant 
presents newly discovered relevant evidence that was not 
available at the time of the Board’s previous considerations of 
a case.  As for the applicant’s requests related to correcting 
his records related to his meritorious service medal (MSM) and 
Air War College attendance, these requests were not filed within 
three years of the alleged error or injustice was discovered as 
required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air 
Force Instruction 36-2603.  Therefore, as his new requests 
involve events which took place over 27 years ago, and the Board 
has, on two occasions thoroughly considered the applicant’s 
promotion consideration, we do not believe it would be in the 
interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely 
file.  The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the 
delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises 
issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the 
merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of 
justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely 
manner.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the additional documentation 
presented in support of the applicant’s requests related to the 
contested OER, duty title, and consideration for promotion to 
lieutenant colonel does not meet the criteria for 
reconsideration by the Board; that the application will only be 
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant 
evidence not considered with this application.  As for the 
applicant’s requests relating to the MSM and attendance at Air 
War College, these requests were not timely filed in accordance 
with our governing statute and AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for 
Correction of Military Records, and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the 
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject these aspects of the 
application as untimely. 

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered the applicant’s 
request for reconsideration of AFBCMR Docket BC-1991-01818 in 
Executive Session on 21 Aug 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit O.  Addendum to Record of Proceedings, 
			dated 31 Jan 08, w/atchs.  
	Exhibit P.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 May 13, w/atchs.