ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00104A
INDEX NUMBER: 131.09
COUNSEL: GARY MYERS
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8).
_________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF THE CASE:
The applicant’s original application was considered and denied in
Executive Session on 3 August 2000 (See AFBCMR 00-00104, with Exhibits
A through D).
By fax dated 14 August 2000, after having received the Board’s
decision, counsel informed the AFBCMR that he had provided a response
to the advisory opinion, dated 16 June 2000, which the Board did not
have an opportunity to review (Exhibit E). The AFBCMR response is at
Exhibit F.
On 21 August 2000, the AFBCMR received the response to the advisory
opinion, dated 16 June 2000. Since the Board did not have an
opportunity to review the response to the advisory opinion, the
material was treated as a request for reconsideration of the
application.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was denied promotion over the years as a result of his filing of an
Equal Opportunity and Treatment (EOT) complaint against his superior,
while he was serving in the position of Base Individual Mobilization
Augmentee Administrator (BIMAA) at Andrews AFB. He was denied an
extension or renewal of his position as a recruiter, which
subsequently resulted in the denial of his promotion to E-8. He was
twice unjustifiably denied promotion, despite having met all
qualifications for promotion, in accordance with Air Force Reserve
directives.
In support of the appeal, the applicant provided a statement from
counsel and copies of documents submitted with the original
application.
The complete submission is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was
insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the
applicant’s original appeal. We have considered the applicant’s most
recent submission and find it insufficient to warrant a reversal of
the previous determination in this case. The issues raised in the
applicant’s submission were adequately addressed in our previous
decision. Moreover, although labeled differently in the original
application, the supporting materials submitted in response to the
advisory opinion are identical to those previously reviewed by the
Board. The only new information the Board found in the material
presented is counsel’s analysis of his client’s case. Therefore, we
find no compelling reason to reverse our earlier decision.
2. 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 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 29 November 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
Mr. Roger E. Willmeth, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit E. Facsimile, Counsel, dated 14 Aug 2000, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Aug 2000.
Exhibit G. Letter, Counsel, dated 16 Jun 2000, w/atchs.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
_________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF THE CASE: On 18 Feb 99, the Board considered and denied an application pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his records be corrected to reflect promotion to the Reserve grade of colonel (see AFBCMR 98-01663, with Exhibits A through E). As to his ability to perform duty as an O-6, there was absolutely no question. A complete copy of the applicant’s request for reconsideration is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2000-02003A
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings, which contains the facts of this appeal and the rationale for the earlier decision by the Board, is attached at Exhibit F. On 17 Oct 00, the Board considered and denied an application from the applicant requesting his records be corrected to reflect he was promoted to the grade of chief master sergeant during the 98E9 cycle. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings, which contains the facts of this appeal and the rationale for the earlier...
The available evidence does indicate that the applicant was qualified and recommended for appointment as a Warrant Officer. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1983-03185
The available evidence does indicate that the applicant was qualified and recommended for appointment as a Warrant Officer. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
The Board’s recommendation was approved by the Director, Air Force Review Board’s Agency on 4 May 98 A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is at Exhibit E (with Exhibits A through D). Now it is up to the Board to do what is right. Therefore, in the absence of clear-cut evidence indicating that the applicant was not afforded full and fair consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by a duly constituted SSB, or that he was treated differently than other similarly situated...
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPAB evaluated this application and recommends denial of the applicant’s request. There is no evidence provided that he has requested an investigation. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded to the Air Force evaluations and stated that both evaluations contained several errors and important items not...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) Memorandum, dated 7 Jun 00, directing that the applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant. Regarding the supplemental promotion consideration, the Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch (AFPC/DPPPWB)...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1999-01926A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1999-01926 INDEX CODE: A68.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 10 Jan 01, the Board considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1994-03165A
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 6 August 1995, the Board considered applicant’s request that he be reinstated on active duty in his former grade with all back pay and allowances and that he be given the opportunity for a new occupational specialty. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the additional documentation submitted by applicant, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Staff Judge Advocate and adopt...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02860
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02860 INDEX CODE 131.01 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the Calendar Year 2000A (CY00A) and CY01B Central Colonel Selection Boards and the 2000 and 2001 Senior Service School (SSS) selection boards. The presence of the...