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


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03220
                                             INDEX CODE: 131.00,
129.01
                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request  for  reconsideration,  he  asks  that  his
records reflect he was promoted to the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel
(LTC) by the Calendar Year 1985 (CY85) LTC  Central  Selection  Board,
and served on continuous active duty in the  permanent  grade  of  LTC
through 31 Mar 97,  giving  him  28  years  of  total  active  federal
commissioned service (TAFSC).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Following two nonselections for promotion to major, the applicant  was
released from active duty on 28 Sep 81 in the grade of  captain  after
12 years, 8 months and 28  days  of  active  service  (included  prior
enlisted and commissioned service).  On 26 Mar 82, he enlisted in  the
Regular Air Force, attained the grade of master sergeant  (MSgt)  and,
on 1 Jul 93, retired in the grade of captain (the highest grade held).

On 8 Oct 86, the Board denied the applicant’s 5 Nov  85  requests  to,
among other things, amend the Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) for
the period 30 Dec  71  through  28 Nov  75  with  recommendations  for
promotion and Regular augmentation, void the OERs  closing  31 Oct  76
and 31 Oct 77, and afford him supplemental consideration  for  Regular
appointment, promotion, and continuation, as well as  his  alternative
requests for direct promotion if not selected or continuation  in  the
grade of captain.

A copy of the 8 Oct 86 Record of Proceedings (ROP) for  AFBCMR  Docket
Number BC-1986-01893, with attachments, is provided at Exhibit I.

On 25 Mar 96, the Board denied the applicant’s 14 Apr 94  requests  to
void the OER closing 31 Oct 76, change the OERs closing 31 Oct 77  and
31 Oct 78, and directly promote him  to  the  grade  of  major  as  if
selected by the CY80 board, as well as his alternative requests to set
aside his nonselection by the CY80 board and continue  him  on  active
duty through 30 Jun 93, correct the OERs closing 31 Oct 76, 31 Oct 77,
and 31 Oct 78, and consider him for promotion to major by an SSB.

A copy of the Addendum ROP (AROP) for BC-1986-01893, dated 16 Dec  96,
with attachments, is provided at Exhibit J.

On 6 Jun 01, a majority of the Board denied the applicant’s  7 Mar  01
requests to amend the 31 Oct 76, 31 Oct 77, and 31 Oct 78 OERs and  to
afford him SSB consideration for Regular appointment and promotion  to
major.  However, on 29 Aug 01, the Director of the  Air  Force  Review
Boards Agency agreed with the minority member’s vote to  void,  rather
than amend, the 31 Oct 76,  77  and  78  OERs  based  on  the  use  of
questionable quotas and afford him SSB consideration for promotion and
augmentation.

A copy of the Second AROP (2AROP) for BC-1986-01893, dated 29 Aug  01,
with attachments, is provided at Exhibit K.

The applicant was subsequently considered and selected  for  promotion
to the grade of major by SSB for the CY81 board with a  date  of  rank
(DOR) of 8 Feb 81.

Additional AFBCMR applications  resulted  in  the  applicant’s  record
being corrected, on 25 Feb 04, to  show  he  was  tendered  a  Regular
appointment effective 8 Feb 81, and that he served  in  the  grade  of
major until his retirement in that grade on 1 Jul 93.

Pursuant to the  applicant’s  9 Sep  05  letter  requesting  a  direct
promotion to the grade of LTC and retirement in  that  grade  with  28
years of service, the AFBCMR Executive Director advised him via letter
dated 26 Sep 05 that this constituted  a  new  request  for  which  he
should file a new DD Form 149.

On 25 Apr 06, the Board denied the applicant’s 5 Oct  05  appeal  (BC-
2005-03220) for direct promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel as
if selected by the CY85 LTC CSB with continuation on  active  duty  in
the permanent grade of LTC through 31 Mar 97, giving him 28  years  of
total federal commissioned service (TAFCS).

A  copy  of  the  ROP  for  BC-2005-03220,  dated  22 May   06,   with
attachments, is at Exhibit L.

In a letter dated 6 Nov 06, the applicant requests reconsideration  of
his case, alleging in part that the ROP, dated  22 May  06,  contained
erroneous statements and factual errors that  seriously  weakened  the
strength of his case as presented to the  Board.   The  ROP  contained
factual errors and did not even come close to summarizing his  remarks
and the new evidence he provided. The Board attributed several  delays
to him, falsely concluding he  was  not  diligent  in  correcting  his
record.  It is obvious the Board’s remarks were based in large part on
the HQ AFPC/JA erroneous advisory.  As a result, he was  not  given  a
fair, impartial and accurate evaluation  by  the  Board  in  his  last
appeal because they relied on  flawed  information  in  the  ROP.   He
provides two attachments that address the  most  serious  and  obvious
errors in the ROP together as  well  as  other  significant  areas  of
concern.  He has underlined statements in the ROP he contends  are  in
error and questionable and then provided in bold type the facts in his
response to each.

The applicant’s complete letter, with two attachments, is  at  Exhibit
M.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In view of the applicant’s contentions and concerns expressed  in  his
6 Nov 06 letter regarding the 12 Jan 06 HQ AFPC/JA  advisory  and  the
22 May 06 ROP for BC-2005-03220, we  granted  the  applicant  de  novo
consideration on our own motion.  We carefully read the ROP, AROP, and
2AROP of the 1986 case; the ROP of  the  2005  case;  the  applicant’s
latest submission; and all the Exhibits pertaining  thereto.  After  a
lengthy and thorough consideration of the  documentation,  statements,
and contentions presented throughout this  more  than  20-year  debate
regarding the applicant’s performance reports and career, we  conclude
direct promotion to the grade of LTC as if selected by  the  CY85  LTC
selection  board  is  unwarranted.   Because  complete  copies  of  an
applicant’s submission and attachments, the advisory  opinion(s),  and
the available military personnel records are provided as  Exhibits  to
an ROP, a Board panel is entirely aware of and can fully  examine  the
entire arguments, facts, and documents pertinent to a given case.   As
such, ROPs do not typically  include  word-for-word  text  from  these
documents.  Also,  a  Board  panel  is  not  required  by  statute  or
regulation to address in sufficient detail to satisfy an applicant  in
every issue he or she may raise, or to discuss every  circumstance  or
aspect of a career.  Some of what the  applicant  takes  exception  to
appear to be the result of condensation, paraphrasing, and  semantics.
Those factual errors that do exist in the 2005 ROP are  harmless  with
respect to our decision  regarding  the  core  issue  of  whether  the
applicant was wrongfully deprived of an assured promotion to the grade
of LTC.  In the final analysis, we  find  the  applicant’s  contention
that he would have, and should have, been promoted to the grade of LTC
extraordinarily speculative.  In 2001,  the  Director  of  the  Review
Boards Agency agreed with a minority member’s recommendation to remove
the  applicant’s  31 Oct  76,  77,  and  78   OERs   and   grant   SSB
consideration.  The applicant was subsequently promoted to  major  and
additional AFBCMR applications resulted  in  his  Regular  appointment
effective 8 Feb 81 and retirement in the grade of major on 1 Jul 93 at
his request. As noted by HQ AFPC/JA in an opinion, dated  January  12,
2006, contrary to the suggestion by the applicant, he was  offered  an
opportunity to request  reinstatement  to  active  duty.   The  record
contains a letter dated January 15, 2003, to applicant from  AFPC/DPOC
informing him that as a result of his retroactive promotion  to  major
“you may submit an addendum to your original  application  to  request
reinstatement to active duty or retirement in the higher grade.”   The
file contains no evidence, however, that applicant ever  requested  to
return to active duty to actually serve as an 0-4 whereupon  he  would
have received performance reports in that grade.  Rather, he opted for
the alternative that awarded him full pay and allowances in the higher
grade of major for over 12 years; a grade in which he did  not  serve.
Had the applicant chosen to be reinstated on active duty, we more than
likely would have provided further corrective action in an  effort  to
permit him to compete for promotion to  a  higher  grade  on  a  level
playing field as  we  have  consistently  done  for  others  similarly
situated.  Since the applicant made no effort to return to active duty
and attempt to become competitive for promotion  to  a  higher  grade,
however, we believe he has received the maximum relief warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 10 January 2007 under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
                 Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03220 was considered:

   Exhibit I.  BC-1986-01893 ROP (8 Oct 86), w/atchs.
   Exhibit J.  BC-1986-01893 AROP, dtd 16 Dec 96, w/atchs.
   Exhibit K.  BC-1986-01893 2AROP, dtd 29 Aug 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit L.  BC-2005-03220 ROP, dtd 22 May 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit M.  Applicant's Letter, dated 6 Nov 06, w/atchs




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair