ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00553 INDEX NUMBER: 111.01; 134.01 COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered on him for the period 12 Jun 02 through 11 Jun 03, be declared void and removed from his records. The letter of reprimand issued to him, dated 21 Feb 03, be declared void and removed from his record. The Unfavorable Information File (UIF) created on him as a result of the LOR be rescinded. All Air Force official records related to the contested OPR, LOR, and UIF be changed and/or purged from his records. _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE In executive session on 21 Jun 07 and 24 Jul 07, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s requests as stated above (Exhibit H). In a 24-page brief of counsel with 11 additional attachments (Exhibit I), dated 14 Aug 09, applicant and counsel request reconsideration of the Board’s earlier decision. Applicant’s counsel cites three factors as the primary basis for the request: 1. That the applicant’s supervisor and rater of record for the contested OPR wrongfully failed to comply with AFI 36-2406, para 3.6.1 by failing to specify any improper behavior that occurred during the rating period to justify his ratings or comments on the referral OPR. 2. The applicant’s supervisor and rater improperly referred to and included a matter that clearly occurred several months before he became the applicant’s supervisor, both in the letter of reprimand, dated 21 Feb 03 and the contested OPR and should have known that the applicant’s previous supervisor and rater was aware of, and had properly disposed of the matter concerning the applicant. 3. The applicant’s supervisor and rater for the contested actions exhibited certain personality traits and behavior which interfered with or prevented him from objectively interfacing with the applicant and was, in fact, the principal reason for, or greatly contributed to his issuing the applicant a letter of reprimand, removing him from command, and giving him a referral OPR. In support of their request, counsel submits nine newly obtained statements. Two of the newly obtained statements are by personnel who served under the applicant’s command in the unit of the contested action either immediately before or during the time the applicant’s worked for the supervisor and rater of the contested actions. Four statements are from former Office of Special Investigations (OSI) agents who either personally experienced the “wrath anger” of this supervisor and rater or personally knew of incidents where other persons were the victim of his anger. One statement is made by a colonel who supervised the applicant immediately after he was relieved from command and another statement is from a senior officer who had previously supervised and worked with the applicant and sought to bring the applicant to OSI headquarters after learning of the applicant’s removal from command. The final statement is from an officer with a background in clinical social work in the Air Force and who has served as a chief of a Air Force mental health clinic. Applicant’s counsel provides a summary of and comments on each statement provided, but requests the Board read each statement in its entirety. The applicant retired from the Air Force in the grade of lieutenant colonel effective 1 Oct 2007. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. After again reviewing the complete evidence of record and the statements submitted by counsel as new evidence, we again find no basis to grant the requested relief. In our view, the statements do not constitute evidence that overcomes our earlier findings in this case. We note that several of the statements only provide each author’s opinion of the applicant or the applicant’s rater and supervisor and shed no new light on the issues of this case. Even if we accepted the statements provided as true, they simply do not provide a basis for determining the rater and supervisor’s actions toward the applicant were arbitrary and capricious and exceeded his discretionary authority. Therefore, absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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 following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00553 in Executive Session on 17 Sep 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00553 was considered: Exhibit H. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 Jun 07 & 24 Jul 07, w/Exhibits. Exhibit I. Applicant’s Reconsideration Request, dated 14 Aug 09, w/atchs. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Panel Chair ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00553 INDEX NUMBER: 111.01; 134.01 COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered on him for the period 12 Jun 02 through 11 Jun 03, be declared void and removed from his records. The letter of reprimand issued to him, dated 21 Feb 03, be declared void and removed from his record. The Unfavorable Information File (UIF) created on him as a result of the LOR be rescinded. All Air Force official records related to the contested OPR, LOR, and UIF be changed and/or purged from his records. _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE In executive session on 21 Jun 07 and 24 Jul 07, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s requests as stated above (Exhibit H). In a 24-page brief of counsel with 11 additional attachments (Exhibit I), dated 14 Aug 09, applicant and counsel request reconsideration of the Board’s earlier decision. Applicant’s counsel cites three factors as the primary basis for the request: 1. That the applicant’s supervisor and rater of record for the contested OPR wrongfully failed to comply with AFI 36-2406, para 3.6.1 by failing to specify any improper behavior that occurred during the rating period to justify his ratings or comments on the referral OPR. 2. The applicant’s supervisor and rater improperly referred to and included a matter that clearly occurred several months before he became the applicant’s supervisor, both in the letter of reprimand, dated 21 Feb 03 and the contested OPR and should have known that the applicant’s previous supervisor and rater was aware of, and had properly disposed of the matter concerning the applicant. 3. The applicant’s supervisor and rater for the contested actions exhibited certain personality traits and behavior which interfered with or prevented him from objectively interfacing with the applicant and was, in fact, the principal reason for, or greatly contributed to his issuing the applicant a letter of reprimand, removing him from command, and giving him a referral OPR. In support of their request, counsel submits nine newly obtained statements. Two of the newly obtained statements are by personnel who served under the applicant’s command in the unit of the contested action either immediately before or during the time the applicant’s worked for the supervisor and rater of the contested actions. Four statements are from former Office of Special Investigations (OSI) agents who either personally experienced the “wrath anger” of this supervisor and rater or personally knew of incidents where other persons were the victim of his anger. One statement is made by a colonel who supervised the applicant immediately after he was relieved from command and another statement is from a senior officer who had previously supervised and worked with the applicant and sought to bring the applicant to OSI headquarters after learning of the applicant’s removal from command. The final statement is from an officer with a background in clinical social work in the Air Force and who has served as a chief of a Air Force mental health clinic. Applicant’s counsel provides a summary of and comments on each statement provided, but requests the Board read each statement in its entirety. The applicant retired from the Air Force in the grade of lieutenant colonel effective 1 Oct 2007. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. After again reviewing the complete evidence of record and the statements submitted by counsel as new evidence, we again find no basis to grant the requested relief. In our view, the statements do not constitute evidence that overcomes our earlier findings in this case. We note that several of the statements only provide each author’s opinion of the applicant or the applicant’s rater and supervisor and shed no new light on the issues of this case. Even if we accepted the statements provided as true, they simply do not provide a basis for determining the rater and supervisor’s actions toward the applicant were arbitrary and capricious and exceeded his discretionary authority. Therefore, absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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 following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00553 in Executive Session on 17 Sep 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00553 was considered: Exhibit H. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 Jun 07 & 24 Jul 07, w/Exhibits. Exhibit I. Applicant’s Reconsideration Request, dated 14 Aug 09, w/atchs. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Panel Chair