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

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-01352

                                             COUNSEL:  STEPHEN R. GIBBLE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the Reserve grade of colonel.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In 1973, he was recommended for promotion to the Reserve grade  of  colonel.
However, the recommendations  were  not  timely  acted  upon  prior  to  his
transfer to Retired  Reserve  Status  (RRS),  and  as  a  result,  the  1978
promotion board took the position that he could not  be  promoted  since  he
had already  transferred  to  RRS.   In  addition,  he  doubts  whether  the
promotion board ever  received  the  AF  Form  77,  Supplemental  Evaluation
Sheet, covering the period from 20 November 1972 to 27 July 1973, which  was
attached to the Officer Effectiveness Report (OER), closing 27 July 1973.

Counsel’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 August 2001, the Board considered and denied applicant’s request  that
his name be placed on the Air Force Reserve  (AFRes)  Retired  List  in  the
grade of colonel (O-6).  For an accounting of the  facts  and  circumstances
surrounding the applicant’s separation, and the  rationale  of  the  earlier
decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E.

On  11  January  2002,  applicant  requested  reconsideration  and  provided
additional  documentation  (Exhibit  F).   However,  in  a   letter,   dated
18 January 2002, he was advised that his request did not meet  the  criteria
for reconsideration by the Board (Exhibit G).

On  25  August  2005,  applicant’s   counsel   submitted   a   request   for
reconsideration,  contending  that   although   applicant   received   three
separation recommendations for promotion  in  1973,  they  were  not  timely
acted upon until after  he  was  transferred  to  RRS.   Counsel’s  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends the application be denied, and  states,  in  part,  that
applicant was given fair and equitable consideration for  promotion  to  the
Reserve grade of colonel by three separate promotion boards, with  the  1973
OER and AF Form 77 matters of record.  However, based on his  date  of  rank
(DOR) to the Reserve grade of lieutenant colonel, he was not eligible  prior
to August  1975.   In  addition,  he  was  not  eligible  for  consideration
following his retirement.

The ARPC/DPB evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit J.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant feels that he  has  earned  promotion  to  the  Reserve  grade  of
colonel based on his 36 years of faithful  service.   Counsel  contends  the
evaluation fails to address whether  or  not  the  colonel  promotion  board
received the  three  evaluations/recommendations  for  his  promotion.   The
recommendations were not timely sent to the promotion  board  and  were  not
timely considered.  As such, he was not given  prompt,  fair  and  equitable
consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel.

Counsel’s complete responses, with attachments, are at  Exhibits  L  through
P.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of  record  and  the  additional
documentation submitted by the applicant, a majority of  the  Board  is  not
persuaded that he has been  denied  fair  and  equitable  consideration  for
promotion to the Reserve grade of colonel.  While his counsel  contends  the
1973 AF Form 77 containing the recommendation for the applicant’s  promotion
was not forwarded to the promotion boards in a timely manner,  the  majority
finds  no  documentary  evidence  has  been  presented   to   support   this
contention.  To the contrary, the majority  notes  that  the  applicant  was
considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of colonel by the FY76,  FY77,
and FY78 colonel boards, with the AF Form 77 as a matter of record  and  was
not selected.  In view of the above, and in the  absence  of  evidence  that
the applicant has been denied fair and equitable promotion consideration,  a
majority of the Board finds no  basis  upon  which  to  recommend  favorable
consideration of the requested relief.

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.

________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of  error  or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2001-
01352 in Executive Session on 25 May 2006, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
      Mr. James L. Sommer, Member

By a majority vote, the Board  voted  to  deny  the  request.   Ms. Mulligan
voted to grant the applicant’s request and submitted a minority report.

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit E.  Record of Proceedings, dated 24 Aug 01,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, applicant, dated 11 Jan 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Jan 02.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, counsel, dated 25 Aug 05.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Nov 05.
    Exhibit J.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 13 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit K.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Dec 05.
    Exhibit L.  Letter, counsel, dated 7 Feb 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit M.  Letter from congressman, dated 27 Feb 06,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit N.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Mar 06.
    Exhibit O.  Letter, counsel, dated 3 Apr 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit P.  Letter from congressman, dated 17 Apr 03,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit Q.  Minority Report, dated 13 Jul 06.



                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2001-01352






MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
                               CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application again be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.





                                           JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                           Director
                                           Air Force Review Boards
Agency