RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-03222
            INDEX NUMBER:  131.00; 126.00;
            111.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXXXXXXX     HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His retirement grade be changed to Master Sergeant  (MSgt)  and  he
receive all back pay and allowances.  As  a  minimum,  he  requests
that his grade be changed to Technical  Sergeant  (TSgt)  with  all
back pay and allowances.

The Air Force Office of Special Investigations  (AFOSI)  and  AFOSI
Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) be reprimanded for illegal  activity  in
regards to actions involving him.

His decertification as an AFOSI agent be reversed and  his  records
corrected to show that he should not have been decertified.

The AFOSI be required to release all  documents  requested  by  him
under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) that he received was
based on exaggerated issues revolving around his off duty  behavior
and that he was illegally transferred to a unit outside  the  AFOSI
and was never given any documents on  this  transfer.   He  further
alleges that this  transfer  was  to  keep  him  from  successfully
appealing the referral EPR.

He was never given the results of his test for  promotion  to  MSgt
and, based on information he received from  personnel  in  the  new
unit he was transferred to, he was selected for promotion to MSgt.

He was given an unjust Article 15 and he did not  make  several  of
the statements attributed to him in his written presentation to the
Article 15.

He made numerous attempts to retrieve documents under  the  Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) pertaining to his case.  He alleges  that
documents he was entitled to receive were not turned  over  to  him
and that the AFOSI willfully violated FOIA procedures.   Among  the
documents he requested were the documents he needed  to  prove  his
innocence, including his first written presentation to the  Article
15 he received.

Illegal actions were taken in regards to his retirement.  While  on
active duty he never received any documents from the SECAF advising
that he would retire as a  SSgt.   His  retirement  documents  were
completed with everything for him to sign as a SSgt based on verbal
information from the AFOSI.  Initially, he refused to sign  his  DD
Form 214 unless it stated he would retire as  a  TSgt.   He  claims
that when the AFOSI was told this, they allegedly responded that he
would  not  collect   any   retirement   pay,   would   remain   on
administrative hold, and his family would not be able to return  to
the US with him at government expense.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information  taken  from  the  applicant’s  Master  Personnel  File
reflects that he served on  active  duty  in  the  Air  Force  from
26 August 1977 to 31 August 1997.

A profile of the applicant’s APR/EPR ratings since 1986 follows:

        PERIOD CLOSING       OVERALL EVALUATION

          15 May 86                 9
          03 Apr 87                 9
          03 Apr 88                 9
          03 Apr 89                 9
         *03 Apr 90                 3 EPR start
          03 Apr 91                 3
          30 Sep 91                 4
          30 Sep 92                 4
          30 Sep 93                 4
          28 Feb 94                 4
          28 Feb 95                 4
        **28 Feb 96                 2

 *  First report as a TSgt.
**  Referral report in question.

The applicant was notified by his commander on 11  Feb  97  of  his
intent to punish the applicant under  Article  15  for  making  and
uttering 49 worthless checks.  The applicant  accepted  proceedings
under Article 15 on 14 Feb  97.   According  to  the  copy  of  the
Article 15 provided  by  the  applicant,  he  marked  that  he  had
attached a written  presentation  (this  is  the  presentation  the
applicant claims  is  missing).   The  applicant  was  punished  on
19 Feb 97 and reduced in grade from TSgt to SSgt with a new date of
rank and effective date of 19 Feb 97.  The applicant  appealed  the
punishment on 26 Feb 97.  His appeal was denied.   He  was  retired
for maximum years of service on 31 Aug 97 in the grade of SSgt.

The initial grade determination issued by the Secretary of the  Air
Force on the applicant, dated 12 Jul 97, incorrectly identified the
applicant as having satisfactorily served in the grade of TSgt   (E-
6).  A new grade determination was issued on 27 Aug 97 that  stated
the highest grade the applicant served in satisfactorily  was  SSgt
(E-5).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Air Force Military Justice Division, AFLSA/JAJM, evaluated this
application and recommend denial of the applicant’s request.

The applicant contends he is not guilty of making and  uttering  49
worthless checks.  He continues to claim errors by  the  bank  were
responsible for the checks being dishonored.  It is clear that  the
applicant wrote 48 checks to the Army and Air  Force  Exchange  and
one to Dollar Rent  A  Car,  all  of  which  were  dishonored  upon
presentation for payment.  After reviewing  all  the  evidence  and
considering the applicant’s explanation, the applicant’s  commander
determined that he did commit the offense.  The appellate authority
also approved the findings and found that the  adjudged  punishment
was appropriate.

The applicant has not provided any evidence  that  warrants  a  set
aside of the Article 15.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The  Special  Programs   Section,   AFPC/DPPRRP,   evaluated   this
application and addressed the retirement processing  issues.   They
also recommend denial of the applicant’s request.

Section 8961,  Title  10,  United  states  Code,  states:   “Unless
entitled to a higher retired grade under some  other  provision  of
law, a Regular or Reserve of the Air Force … who retires other than
for physical disability retires in the  regular  or  reserve  grade
that he holds on the date of his retirement.”  In  the  applicant’s
case, the grade he held on the last day of active duty was SSgt.

Section 8964, Title 10, United States Code, allows the  advancement
of enlisted members (when their active service plus service on  the
retired list total 30 years) on the retired  list  to  the  highest
grade in  which  they  served  on  active  duty  satisfactorily  as
determined by the Secretary of the Air Force  (SECAF).   The  SECAF
has delegated this authority to the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force
Personnel Council (SAF/PC).  On 27 Aug 97,  the  SAF/PC  determined
that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily in any grade higher
than SSgt.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

The   Inquiries/AFBCMR   Section,   AFPC/DPPPWB,   evaluated   this
application and addressed the applicant’s request to be promoted to
MSgt.

Present Air Force policy does not allow for an automatic  promotion
as the applicant is  requesting.   The  applicant  states  that  he
tested for promotion to MSgt in Jan 96.  This would have  been  for
the 96E7 cycle with promotions effective 1 Aug 96 through 1 Jul 97.
 Because the applicant received a referral  EPR  with  a  close-out
date of 28 Feb 96, he automatically became ineligible for promotion
in accordance with a 1 Aug 95 HQ AFMPC policy that rendered members
ineligible for promotion if they received a referral EPR or had  an
overall rating of “2” on their latest EPR.  If the applicant tested
in Jan 96, his  tests  would  not  have  been  scored  due  to  his
ineligibility for promotion.

If the Article 15 is set aside, the applicant’s effective  date  of
rank to TSgt is 1 Apr 90.  Since the applicant never served in  the
grade of MSgt, there is no  basis  or  valid  reason  to  authorize
promotion to this grade.

AFPC/DPPPWB deferred to the overall recommendation of AFLSA/JAJM.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant responded to the evaluations as follows:

The applicant states that  in  Jul  96,  his  Detachment  Commander
informed  him  that  the  Region   Commander   was   handling   his
investigation and that he was going  to  be  court–martialed.   The
applicant states that he was not court-martialed because there  was
no evidence against him.

The applicant states that he was advised that his stripe was  taken
because of issues he addressed in his written presentation  to  the
Article 15 and the fact that he never had the money to send to  his
account.  He states that he denied making  comments  attributed  to
him  in  his  written  presentation  and  that  now   the   written
presentation  is  missing.   He  states  that  a   statement/ledger
provided by his credit union that clearly shows all activity on his
account is  also  missing.   He  states  that  these  documents  he
presented to exonerate himself and requested in FOIA requests  were
not returned to him.   He  believes  that  the  AFOSI  and  JA  are
deliberately suppressing  the  documents.   He  states  that  since
evidence was never presented to prove the offense against  him  and
the fact that the evidence he presented  to  exonerate  himself  is
missing, he doesn’t see how any reasonable person  could  find  him
guilty of committing the offense he was charged with.

He states that the documents withheld from him in his FOIA requests
are integral parts of the investigation and  contained  information
to exonerate him of the investigated offenses.

The applicant states that he was unable to complete the  appeal  of
his referral EPR because of being transferred out of the AFOSI.

The applicant again states that documents were  withheld  from  him
regarding his decertification  from  AFOSI.   He  states  that  the
letter from the AFOSI commander stated that  he  had  reviewed  the
package from the Region commander, yet the only item  he  has  seen
was a letter recommending his decertification.  He states that  the
AFOSI commander never answered his questions as to whether  or  not
he reviewed the two written presentations and credit  union  ledger
submitted by the applicant.

The applicant points out various problems he found with the  copies
of the 27 Aug 97  grade  determination  done  by  the  SECAF.   The
applicant  states  that  both  of  the  copies  he  received   were
fabricated.  He states that he never realized that  corruption  was
so rampant.

The applicant claims that he was  kept  on  illegal  administrative
hold and stayed in a hotel at government expense until 31  Aug  97.
He states he only signed the DD Form 214 on 3 Sep 97  retiring  him
as a SSgt because he could not afford to pay the continued cost  of
staying in the hotel.

The applicant states that it is not right for the AFOSI and  JA  to
abuse their power and use illegal  measures  against  him  and  his
family.  He further states that they did  not  have  the  right  to
abuse his civil rights as they did.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.

__________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We  took
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits
of  the  case;  however,   we   agree   with   the   opinions   and
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary  responsibility
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In
view of the lack of evidence provided by the applicant  to  support
his contentions that the actions taken against him while on  active
duty were improper, contrary to the governing regulations, or based
on erroneous information, we find no basis upon which to grant  his
requests for  retirement  in  the  grade  of  master  sergeant  and
reversal of his decertification as an AFOSI agent.

4.  Applicant’s requests that  the  Air  Force  Office  of  Special
Investigation (AFOSI) and  AFOSI  Staff  Judge  Advocate  (SJA)  be
reprimanded for illegal activity in  regard  to  actions  involving
him, and that the  AFOSI  be  required  to  release  all  documents
requested by him under the Freedom  of  Information  Act  are  duly
noted.  However, these issues are not a  matter  coming  under  the
purview of this Board.  Furthermore, documentation provided by  the
applicant reflects he has been advised  of  the  appeal  procedures
with respect to his FOIA request.

5.  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  issue   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  15  June  2000,  under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
      Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
      Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Dec 99, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 14 Feb 00.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 8 Mar 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 14 Mar 00, w/atch.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Mar 00.
    Exhibit G.  Memorandum, Applicant, dated 6 Apr 00, w/atchs.




                                   HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                   Panel Chair