ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03168
INDEX NUMBER: 111.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered on her for the period 14
Jun 01 through 13 Jun 02 be voided and removed from her records.
_______________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
On 19 Feb 04, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request
as stated above (Exhibit K). The applicant was represented by counsel
who presented her case in a 16-page brief (Exhibit A).
In a 13-page letter with seven attachments, dated 14 Sep 04, the
applicant requests reconsideration of the Board’s decision (Exhibit L).
Due to an administrative error, the applicant was mistakenly sent the
decision documents on a case other than her own. As such, she believed
the Board did not consider her request for a personal hearing. In
fact, the Board did consider her request for a hearing, but did not
believe it would aid their understanding of the issues involved in her
case and so denied her request. The applicant was so advised in a
letter forwarding the correct decision documents (Exhibit M). In a
letter written to her Congressman, dated 20 Sep 04, the applicant
initiated a Congressional Inquiry. A copy of the letter was forwarded
to the AFBCMR for response (Exhibit N). In its response through the
Air Force Legislative Liaison office, the Board summarized the actions
taken to date in the applicant’s case and advised the newly submitted
information would be reviewed for a determination as to whether it met
the criteria for reconsideration by the Board.
_______________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. After reviewing the complete evidence of record including that
submitted in support of her request for reconsideration submitted
directly to the Board and through her Congressman, we have determined
the applicant’s most recent submissions do not provide relevant new
evidence warranting reconsideration of the Board’s earlier decision to
deny the requested relief. We are unable to comprehend the connection
the applicant seeks to establish between her 2002 PRF, the FOIA
information she provides and the contested OPR. In our view, the
applicant’s statement to the Board and the letter to her Congressman
simply provide an expanded view of the same information submitted by
her counsel in the original appeal. As such, the rationale we
originally provided for denying this case is still valid.
2. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it still 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 still 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 30 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit K. Record of Proceeding, w/atchs, dated 11 Mar 04.
Exhibit L. Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Sep 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit M. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Sep 04.
Exhibit N. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Sep 04.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-00745A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-00745 INDEX CODES: 131.01, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be directly promoted to the grade of colonel; or, he again be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by the Calendar Year 2001A (CY01A) Colonel...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02770A
A complete copy of the applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. Since the Article 32 ROI was not obtainable when the applicant’s appeal was first reviewed and based on what appeared to be excerpts of the ROI in his latest submission, on 28 Mar 03 the AFBCMR Staff requested he provide a complete copy of the Article 32 ROI for the Board to examine when his case was reviewed for possible reconsideration. Also provided is a 4 Oct 00 letter from the wing commander dismissing...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1986-03661-2A
We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the RE code be upgraded on the basis of clemency. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the additional 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02470
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02470 (CASE 4) INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be directly promoted to the grade of major as though selected by the Calendar Year 2003B (CY03B) Major Central Selection Board. On 4 Aug 04 and 18 Aug 04, the Board considered the applicant’s request that his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-04019A
The applicant stated that on the advice of his Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) hearing officer, he should request the Air Force correct his records so that he would be rated for his condition of “Filariasis.” The applicant was advised by the AFBCMR in a letter dated 19 Apr 05 that his request did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board (Exhibit G). On 28 Sep 05, the AFBCMR responded to a second Congressional Inquiry (Exhibit I), which asked that it be explained to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2001-00404A
In a letter to her Congressman, applicant contends a federal judge ruled in Dec 03 the order to take the anthrax vaccine was illegal (Exhibit G). Additionally, we note that litigation concerning the anthrax vaccination program is still pending and that additional rulings have been made since the one referenced by the applicant that the order to take the anthrax vaccination was illegal. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2004-03660
Applicant’s complete submissions are at Exhibit A. Applicant has not provided credible evidence why these awards were not placed in official channels and has not provided justification as to why these issues were not addressed until six years after the fact. However, other than his own uncorroborated assertions, no evidence has been submitted to show that recommendations for the AFAM and AFCM were placed into official military channels during the time periods in question but were not acted...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01611
By virtue of a DD Form 149, dated 24 Oct 12, with attachments, the applicant requests reconsideration of her case, indicating that a miscommunication with the AFBCMR staff precluded her from being able to provide comments or file a Complaint Pursuant to Article 138, UCMJ in regard to the Command Directed Investigation (CDI) that was used by the Board to make a determination in her case. Additionally, according to documentation provided by the applicant, the 12th Air Force Commander, when...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00395A
The overall recommendation on her Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was “Promote.” On 14 Jul 05, the AFBCMR considered and denied the applicant’s request for voidance of her 4 Jun 04 OPR and consideration by an SSB for the CY04A selection board. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F. The applicant has provided additional evidence showing she did...