Compiled file 2009
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
Mr. Pete Geren
Dear Secretary Geren:
Welcome to this dispute. This letter is basically a heads up to an issue of some duration that has met with less than enthusiastic review.
In positions of authority many use NO as their answer to indepth analysis of situations and diversity. As you can see this case was not addressed with best interest to What is Due.
Enclosed are recent correspondence to key individuals who can in best interest resolve this indifference to a real concern for every Reservist whomever enlisted or reenlisted in our Military organizations. Basically, it is fairness and operating within the laws.
Briefly, this was a case of a contract beening ignored ilo of illegal orders never cut and a third party agency without jurisdiction to settle this dispute in statute due to exhaustion of adaministrative appeals denied by perpetrators violating all military codes of Honor, Duty, Mission.
Within this packet are links to background information, summaries, military records, OERs, etc. Please take some time to look at these before staffing this. It will give you some perspective and maybe empathy to follow through.
Eugene R Zarwell, LTC (ret.
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
Sec Army-Army Review Board:
This request is to reopen a very long time ago dispute that could not be resolved while perpetrators were still in the system. This case involved a special project that was originally to be contracted until OASD-RA thought
they could do it as AT learning there was neither support at DCAR no a TDA position in OASD Stephen Duncan's office.
Ignoring this incident for this long has not complied with those high ethical standards afforded members of our military who selflessly serve our nation. Statute of limitations has never run out on this matter due to continuous filings at every level of court within this nation. Resulting from very self-serving opinions offered through corrupt senior OCAR who thought ignorance of detail and restricting resolution to jurisdictional responsibility meant that DCAR ignorance in the matter was superior to Sec Def request for contractual services.
This option to bring this back to your attention was encouraged many times by senior staff at the Army Review Board which is reason for this reminder that a decision is still pending.
Eugene R Zarwell, LTC
Incl: Letters- CIC, Treasury Sec, SecDef, Chm-JCS, Attorney General
Eugene Robert Zarwell
Prepared: Friday, September 6, 2002
It is a matter of back pay and benefits totaling more than $750,000 accruing from June 1991.
Cause of action was a breach of trust after more than 27 years of providing “on-call” service to the Defense Department, U.S. Army in particular, in marketing and advertising after receiving a direct commission in January 1969. In this high visibility unique position, I was afforded many opportunities to support the leadership of this country and subsequently leaders in other parts of the world, but one incident destroyed that trust and the rewards from serving at the top.
In particular, I was asked in January 1991 to provide, as a contractor to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs (OSDRA), project direction of a videotape report of the Persian Gulf War for delivery to NATO leaders on July 15th in Paris. It took 2,200 hours of my time in little more than 5 months to accomplish that task. The amount earned was $220,000 but only 10% was paid as equivalent active duty pay minus entitlements and per diem.
The consequences were horrendous. I received 12 days pay at Lieutenant Colonel rank one month after beginning the project in a swap of Reserve training time from First U.S. Army to assist the Secretary define the project and produce a simple report for use in an April 18, 1991 speech. It was so successful that I was asked to continue the project as a contractor because there existed no Table of Distribution Authorization (TDA) position for the specialty required. They secured additional ADT bringing the total to 58 days of the 152 in the period.
Defense Audio Visual Services in February determined a government rate of $100 per hour estimating a six-week project or about $42,000 in compensation. OSDRA learning of this said it would secure the contract and I should not worry. After April when no contract was forthcoming, they said they would produce active duty orders that covered an additional few weeks.
The Marine Colonels in charge of the office tasked with oversight failed to exercise the contracting procedure fearing they might not get a contract in time to meet the requirement. They decided without my knowledge to pursue my services as a Lieutenant Colonel on extended annual training - an illegal procedure that resulted in no orders and very little pay without benefits for the duration.
Precedent was set for the $100 per hour in the original agreement with the Defense Audio Visual Services and subsequently ratified in a postproduction-editing contract on one-day notice to make changes that required 10 hours in the studio. The $1,000 was paid with no difficulty within three days.
After 45 months attempting to administratively correct records and collect monies due for the 2,200 hours of contract working 1991, I filed a claim in The United States Court of Federal Claims. The case, EUGENE ROBERT ZARWELL, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant; number is 95-86C (Judge Futey). A judgment in favor of the Plaintiff resulted in payment of equivalent military pay taking into account previously paid amounts for the two periods under annual training orders. Several stipulations cited by the Justice Department have not been met by the Department of the Army as cited by the Justice Department.
After the fact, Justice stated military benefits were outside their jurisdiction and I had to administratively approach the Army for restitution. The Army lost my records in 1994 unknown to me, but known to the Justice Department, thus I was out of the system and top level politicians, Corporate executives who did their due diligence on me stated that I lied about my service record. This was not apparent to me until 1998. I had no recourse but to wait until the perpetrators were out of the Army Reserve system. And, they are out and enjoying the fruits of their careers.
Precedent in the Army has been, as long as I can remember, to extend the active duty period until disputes are settled. This did not happen in my case creating loss of credibility and means of income.
During the dispute on or about October 1993 and prior to the court case, the Department of the Army completed a security investigation and granted a TOP Secret clearance in preparation for promotion to Colonel (O6). The same perpetrators at the Office of the Chief Army reserve who denied orders for the OSDRA project based upon TDA buried my records in an office building in Roslyn, Virginia where a clerk in year 2000 found them and reentered them back into the system and sent an authorization for an ID card that was issued to me on 2000AUG01 – it was only 5 years too late for promotion to Colonel in the 1994 Board that I was led to believe received my promotion packet prior to my mandatory removal date. I did have a call from one of the promotion board members asking me if I decided not to submit a packet to the Board in 1994 to that I answered that three packets were prepared and forwarded to OCAR for submission, 1) prepared by me, 2) prepared by my PMO at ARPERCEN, and 3) a packet prepared by my secretary at FUSA. None were received at the Board.
I received no further correspondence from the Army Reserve until I requested a record of my retirement points that did not reflect any points from the 1991 “tour” or any subsequent time spent on litigation. The points requested in 1998 were for the period paid as equivalent to active duty because the DoJ could not include that in their payments out of the judgment fund because points and non-taxable entitlements and per diem had to come from the Defense funds.
My request is to secure restitution based upon current value for the wrong doing by the Army Department, and restore my credibility/dignity with Congressional approval of a post retirement promotion to Brigadier General (07), one two denied through malicious abuse of power afforded the Office of the Chief Army Reserve by Major Robert Pratt, Brigadier General Roger Bultman, Major Generals Sanders, Ward and Kilmartin who turned their heads away on the matter.
My record was exemplary and documented in Officer Evaluation Reports more frequently than other officers because of the many short tours I performed “on-call” for the TOP leadership.
Thank you in advance for taking the time to read and resolve this unique request.
Eugene Robert Zarwell
Executed: 2 December 1996
Facts of the Case
(for background only)
Plaintiff received a telephone request from two (06), Colonels (Marine Colonel William Gresslin and Army Reserve Colonel Richard Flahaven) representing themselves as assigned to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs (ASD-RA) and having approval from the Secretary to employ Plaintiff to provide professional services in production of a video tape. The project was presented as an after action videotape of Reserve component support to operation "Desert Shield/ Desert Storm" with a production deadline of 15 July. After gaining the consent of the Plaintiff to accept the work, Plaintiff was asked to prepare a treatment for presentation to the Secretary to project the nature, creation and the approach to be taken to complete the video tape.
In the initial discussions Plaintiff requested a professional services contract at the government rate of $100.00 per hour. Defendant's representatives expressed desire to employ the Plaintiff using active duty orders stating that they did not want to wait the 45 days to advertise the position; position was neither authorized by a TDA or by a formal request to Army's Manpower office.
In lieu of a contract or orders beginning 03 February 1991 to contract completion, Flahaven and Gresslin, on behalf of Assistant Secretary Duncan, attempted to expedite the securing of professional services to produce a video tape by 15 July 1991 by diverting the energies of the Plaintiff without his consent and in violation of the Army regulations effecting Individual Mobilization Augmentees, from his annual training to that of their project via an amendment change to Plaintiff's annual training venue at First U.S. Army to OASD-RA with the promise of obtaining for the Plaintiff a contract or an enlargement of the orders both retroactively and forward for the period beginning 03 February 1991.
In March the project was expanded to include another second videotape with a earlier deadline of 18 April. This necessitated a compressing pre-production workload from 45 days to less than two weeks to gain DoD authorization to produce a video plus the associated resources and funding to complete the postproduction editing. The form, DoD 1995, requires a budget, a treatment, a timetable, a search of resources, and list of proposed facilities to provide postproduction (editing).
In addition, specifications had to be developed and published for securing three bids from local video production houses as well as storyboards for estimating hours to build graphics and titles to be incorporated into the production. This production activity was accomplished prior to 15 April, the day when the Plaintiff's IMA tour at First Army was scheduled to begin, and the day when at 2:00 p.m., the Plaintiff and the Project officer began final edit.
In other words, all the pre-production work that took the majority of February and March to accomplish would have had to be accomplished from 0800 hours to 1400 hours that day. Working 18-20 per day for more than 30 days straight- no break- the first video was delivered to the ASD-RA at 0730 Hours on 18 July as a result of more than 60 hours of continuous editing at Interface Video in Washington..
With the first project completed and one and half months expended, the Plaintiff and Project Officer were required to duplicate pre-production efforts to assure authorization from DoD for the primary project which had a backlog of more than 500 hours that required review, selection and duplicating before editing it into a 10 minute presentation of relevant information about reservist involvement in the Persian Gulf War. It took the better part of seven months for the Marine Colonel, COL. Greslin to catalog and identify more than 70 hours of video for selection into the final presentation, and it took May and June to identify and create graphics that would stand alone in communicating staggering statistics while compressing the time to ten minutes to tell the story about the 100 hour war. The project was delivered to the OASD-RA on 3 July 1991 for showing to the Coalition leadership in Paris on 15 July 1991.
|Gene Zarwell, USAR, ret.
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
The White House
To: Commander in Chief,
All your talk about saving American entrepreneurs has resulted in Congress saving their own Asses at your expense; and, frankly all of us who believe in American style Democracy do not like it.
It was manifested after your buddy, Bill Clinton, demanded housing risk that resulted in financial instability. He then followed up with deregulating investment houses without offering guidelines to make profits that opened all markets to fraud without best professional practices.
In 1991, I accepted a contract to produce an after-action, video-report for DoD on Desert Shield/Storm at SSS referral after producing 100’s of motivational projects for our Joint Forces plus other government agencies.
Proposed was a project for a NATO after-action report on Reserve involvement on Persian Gulf actions after deterrent Kuwaiti oil ship escort failed to contain Iraqi forces in 1988-1990.
Estimated by uninitiated project officers this task was to be a two-week editing job. It exceeded five months with several added requirements. Kind of what you inherited. Personal time accrued to 2,200 hours - equivalent to one-man year without holidays requiring sleeping at studios due to time restraints.
Briefly, our agreement for over 27 years was a military rate of $100/hr for contracts through Department of the Army Audio-visual separate from Doc Clark’s office at Defense Contracting for continuing $10 Million annual contracts for Military PSAs campaigns in all 50 states during the 1970s. This was a concession from acceptable commercial rates that grew to $350/hr over the years. U.S. Marine Project officers failed to ratify that agreement. They instead attempted to exploit an Army Reserve tour, since rank of LTC was subordinate to theirs.
However, that was an illegal action as there was no position at OASD-RA (Assistant Secretary Stephen Duncan) for appropriate assignment
Historical concern is that. Your Justice Department – although prior to your assumption of responsibility- imposed restrictions in 1997, from their third-party position as not having jurisdiction to award agreed compensation even after Judge Futay, U.S. Court of Federal Claims, ruled favorably. This was after DoD assignees failed to secure either option after contract satisfaction.
Bottom line was that compensation never met our agreed terms. OSDA-RA was successful in securing two, two-week Reserve AT tours at basic drill pay or about $30,000 (DoD can brief you on differential from active duty to Reserve pay as well as violation of contract vs. Reserve understanding).
OASD-RA had reiterated for five months that active duty orders were requested through OCAR (Office Chief Army Reserve) but never sent confirmation of rejection for reasons stated above.
They did require this officer to work in uniform as well as perform military duties with ancillary assignments: i.e.: inter-office correspondence, write award justification for DoD civilian/military personnel assigned to support that 1991 Iraqi war; which by the way, was not awarded this dedicated contractor/Reservist for his 2,200 hours preparing and delivering Answering the Call for its NATO premier in Italy on July 15, 1991.
Consequences of this abuse of power resulted in not only loss of income from this project, but eliminated other billable work as well as rank promotions along with entitlement regarding collection from date of infringement or conflict of military pay (December 1990 through date of OASD-RA issuance entitlements – still open as are promotion board orders for O5 Colonel and O6 Brigadier General)
Entitlements according to tradition and DoD precedent should be calculated for Lieutenant Colonel, over 27 yrs, for 4 years, date of filing complaint plus promotions to each subsequent rank, over 34 years, from 1995 along with Award for serving during Desert Shield/Storm on assignment to OASD-RA or equivalent to $100/hour for period from January 1991 to date of promotion to Colonel – still pending.
Enclosed is a composite CD of what are considered the best messages. Creativity of these shorts stretches nearly 4 decades, 1971 to 2008, of technology that exceeded our mass media production capabilities for some creative enhancements designed for these productions.
I look forward to our Commander in Chief to make good on this assignment as I did in 1991.
Eugene Robert Zarwell
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
April 6, 2009
Secretary Tim Geithner Dear Sec. Geithner: You are receiving this letter because it explains in someway why I cannot file for tax refunds. Quite simply as cited in this incident I have been denied adequate income from a special, high visibility project that had
urgency no one else could handle. An immediate video production of American actions in Operation Desert Storm/Shield required for a March OASD-RA presentation and full NATO Coalition meeting in July 1991. One question I have is: can I recover from this l-o-n-g d-r-a-w-n out delay by bureaucrats through a special recovery stimulus request? As you will read I have tried to right this wrong through every administrative avenue within DoD, have with respect attempted to correct DoJ perceptions of the maligned decision, and was quite aware that action officers at
OASD-RA did not understand the illegal position they were inserting me into. Unfortunately, this intense project left me no time to fight the administrative remedy. I was living at the video studio 24 hours a day for the
majority of the six + months it took to edit 500 hours of video into a 13 minute presentation. It set in 1991 new standards of video production through highly complicated special effects beyond technology for titling and clarity
in communications of Reserve operations in Persian Gulf security. A second question is: Can I get an exemption from Federal and State Income Taxes until the more than $2 Million of pay and benefits including Medicaid and Medicare are matched to what I lost over these last 18 years. It was
bad enough to be stiffed by DoD because of DoJ’s lack of jurisdiction to resolve restitution from Defense monies. They demanded that I perform as though on active duty while telling me they were trying to issue illegal orders.
I had a standing agreement with Defense and Army Audio-visual for a government rate of $100 per hour for contract work. I did and may still have a copy of that invoice in 1991 that went unanswered. Your attention to this minor detail amongst the many you are reviewing will be appreciated, and I might be willing to assist your department at a senior level with immunity including resolution of this unfortunate situation
leaving me homeless for 10 years that ended when I was informed by DFAS of a $18,875.5 annual Reserve retirement plus 2 years later $1,289 from Social Security. Not a good recommendation for marketing our defense force. Sincerely,
Secretary Tim Geithner
Dear Sec. Geithner:
You are receiving this letter because it explains in someway why I cannot file for tax refunds. Quite simply as cited in this incident I have been denied adequate income from a special, high visibility project that had urgency no one else could handle. An immediate video production of American actions in Operation Desert Storm/Shield required for a March OASD-RA presentation and full NATO Coalition meeting in July 1991.
One question I have is: can I recover from this l-o-n-g d-r-a-w-n out delay by bureaucrats through a special recovery stimulus request?
As you will read I have tried to right this wrong through every administrative avenue within DoD, have with respect attempted to correct DoJ perceptions of the maligned decision, and was quite aware that action officers at OASD-RA did not understand the illegal position they were inserting me into. Unfortunately, this intense project left me no time to fight the administrative remedy. I was living at the video studio 24 hours a day for the majority of the six + months it took to edit 500 hours of video into a 13 minute presentation. It set in 1991 new standards of video production through highly complicated special effects beyond technology for titling and clarity in communications of Reserve operations in Persian Gulf security.
A second question is: Can I get an exemption from Federal and State Income Taxes until the more than $2 Million of pay and benefits including Medicaid and Medicare are matched to what I lost over these last 18 years. It was bad enough to be stiffed by DoD because of DoJ’s lack of jurisdiction to resolve restitution from Defense monies. They demanded that I perform as though on active duty while telling me they were trying to issue illegal orders. I had a standing agreement with Defense and Army Audio-visual for a government rate of $100 per hour for contract work. I did and may still have a copy of that invoice in 1991 that went unanswered.
Your attention to this minor detail amongst the many you are reviewing will be appreciated, and I might be willing to assist your department at a senior level with immunity including resolution of this unfortunate situation leaving me homeless for 10 years that ended when I was informed by DFAS of a $18,875.5 annual Reserve retirement plus 2 years later $1,289 from Social Security. Not a good recommendation for marketing our defense force.
Encl: Ltr to President
The Honorable Robert Gates
This matter has dwelled long enough and created much dissatisfaction between departments than anyone should endure. Service to our nation was honorable, loyal, and legitimate compared to those who refused to follow both regulations and protocol.
Throughout my multi-career, balance for a renaissance Twice the citizen was very difficult tight rope developing marketing for our services as a advertising agency leader, a commander of troops as a Reserve/National Guard Officer, and on call to your department when required for strategic and tactical media planning.
Attached is a letter to our Commander in Chief to finally resolve this issue through one of two avenues. First it can be resolved by honoring the contract and invoice for $220,000 plus 10% percent annual interest penalty for failure to satisfy a standing agreement with appropriate agencies; and second to enforce the OASD-RA’s preferred means through illegal orders that were never issued for that reason but demanded that I perform as on active duty.
This second remedy is preferred since DoJ rationed an unacceptable solution from lack of jurisdiction over Defense contracting. It requires back pay, promotions, and several awards if properly executed. There are precedents that need to be followed over two decades.
CIC letter contains a number of web references addressing this situation with exacting details as well as PDF files are available of administrative appeals, several court experiences, and performance reports including OER’s from exceptionally high level Military in several services attesting to authenticity of this claim.
This service was performed under Sec Def Dick Chaney, denied by Sec Def Bill Cohen, and ignored by Sec Def Rumsfeld. Lack of DoD integrity has denied a well-earned retirement that is now developing into a nightmare of medical fraud charges and threats to the little entitlement a Reservist receives for 34+ years of availability and dedicated service.
Many policies at DoD need review to make our military even better than what was handed to you. Perhaps, we can get together or you can direct appropriate staff to learn perceptions about what is wrong with our All Voluntary Force – something we created early in decade 1970.
Gene Zarwell, LTC, USAR/ARNG ret.
20 April 2009
Attorney General Eric Holder
I hate to bother you on this matter, but it needs to be addressed as you will note from the attached correspondence, links to references, and malfunction of your inherited department.
Yes, this is complicated; and, yet - not so.
It is a smple matter of constitutional law for plaintiff to get what is due. Work was done under extreme conditions to get a NATO Coalition report created immediately after our 100 hour war in Iraq February 1991. Selective Service System (SSS) Directors recommended to Office of the Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs that I produce their video report. SSS had benefitted from my services several times during government consideration to close them down.
Due to embarassing circumstances of trust and loyalty, I accepted the project understanding it would be at a reduced government rate of $100 per hour over a two week period. Well. with OASD-RA’s inexperience with this media, it took more than five months. Exisiting contract agreements went unheeded i.l.o attempting to secure military Reserve orders, illegal in this situation because of lack of position vacancy.
However, OASD-RA proceeded as though it would be successful – it was not. Your Department, officially speaking had a remedy without basis since Chief Army Reserve denied orders and removed my records from ARPERCEN in 1995; and buried them in a Roslyn, VA office until they were discovered in July 2002.
Your commercial office decided without justification to offer as a last chance, under threat that if not acceptable would be withdrawn, for an equivalent to reserve basic pay with no entitlements since it was beyond their jurisdiction. I drafted and signed a stipulation accepting their meager offer leaving open recapture of military pay and entitilements through DoD by using the words, ignoring those benefits from DoJ. However, after they verbally agreed to allowing that, there were 6-8 pages of threats, restrictions and other meaningless gibberish that has been construed to deny entilements even though the Army Review Board for Correction of Records was prepared to do that as DoJ originally agreed. It was refused through DCAR’s interference to deny credit for service rendered, just prior to a, COL 06, promotion board.
Please reverse DoJ’s injustice of 1997, and urge the Secretary of the Treasury to cut the check as well as urge DoD to make restitution for the defamation and denial of entitlements including recinding those phony threats. The $27,000 paid in 1997 can be deducted from the several million dollars in entitlements, back pay, and promotions due before and after third party interference from Jan 1991 to the contract satisfaction date with penalties date. If payment is duplicated through either suggested avenue, you can bet it will trickle down judiciously.
Attch: CIC, JCS, Sec Def, Treas Sec, AP
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman
This letter is written from much frustration and angst from how DoD treats its loyal members. Briefly, careers in private sector and Reserve conflicted many times to where sacrificing private sector earnings in order to support requesting DoD agencies with professional services in marketing denied income and valuable family relationships. This arrangement spanned from 1964 through 1997 as both enlisted and as a direct commissioned officer (1969).
Corporate experience transferred to military management and unit performance brought much respect from senior leadership requesting special projects through multi-million dollar contracts as well as frequent short term duty assignments in appropriate slots resulted in an all voluntary army, reaching post Viet Nam recruiting goals, increased Reserve strengths from 65 percent to over 110 percent within eighteen months (1973-1975).
As Twice a Citizen, this officer commanded several Public Affairs Detachments developing national public affairs goals on weekends, at summer camps, and through special joint-exercises resulting in combat ready media teams; authoring regulations for media support including authorizations for appropriating Public Service Advertising. While a defense contractor with The Bendix Corporation, and six major advertising agencies, his programs were conceived and tested through field exercises to keep our troops Proud and Ready.
After 27 years of reciprocal loyalty, one project of high visibility was underestimated by several project officers, until Selective Service System, Acting Director Lou Brodsky recommended this officer to produce OASD-RA’s video Desert Shield/Storm, an after-action report for a March 1991 Employer Support the Guard and Reserve National Conference, then added a July 5, 1991 deadline for the NATO Coalition meeting in Italy.
This officer spent more than 2,200 hours in less than six-months under assumed agreements with Defense Contracting (Doc Cook), Defense, and Army Audio-visual agencies for $100 per hour military rate. OASD-RA action officers attempted to limit costs by requesting illegal orders, never issued, using extensions of AIT rather than ADT in an incompatible MOS at OASD-RA.
Result was four weeks AIT w/o entitlements covering more than 179 days that later required a post contract to make requested changes at $100/hour for 10 hours, just to avoid entitlements or agreed-upon pay.
Personal time was equivalent to one-man year without holidays that required sleeping at studios to reduce daily travel due to time constraints.
First, it can be resolved by honoring the contract and invoice for $220,000 plus 10% percent interest per year penalty for failure to satisfy a standing agreement with appropriate agencies, or;
Second, enforce OASD-RA’s required verbal orders that demanded I perform on active duty. However, orders were never issued for reason it was illegal without a position vacancy. It requires from January 1991 to satisfaction - back pay, entitlements, promotions, and several awards if properly executed.
Preferred is second remedy since DoJ rationalized an unacceptable solution from lack of jurisdiction over Defense contracting. It was learned later, had no access to this Officer’s service record, believing it was a bogus claim, after Deputy Chief Army Reserve Brigadier General Bultman removed them from ARPERCEN (DCAR)(1995) hiding them in an Roslyn, VA office.
There are precedents that need to be followed after four decades. When pay or medical was in dispute after a tour of duty, soldiers received military entitlements (pay, healthcare, and in some promotions or disabilities) until resolution. In this case, no entitlements were received, as DoJ had no jurisdiction to do so. In fact, this officer wrote and signed a stipulation that was later modified by DoJ to include 6-8 pages of restrictions inserted between draft and signature never disclosed until Judge Futay at the Court of Federal Claims signed an Order in favor and Chief Justice Loren Smith attested a transcript signed by David A. Lampen, Clerk.
This violation of trust has jeopardized this officer's retirement, healthcare and credibility making it impossible to buy a home, finance anything, seek medical attention even though our military contracts in the 60’s gave us full retirement benefits if we retired after 20 years – nice promise, poor joke; and when challenging the system it is worse than the healthcare industry with bogus billing questions and failure to pay in emergency situations. This needs to be resolved in this officer’s case denied by third-party interference through TriCare denials that need to be addressed.
There was never a thought that our government would expect payment for promised services while neglecting to meet its responsibilities to pay its bills; that it requested on short-term notice – like one week for a six month commitment. During that time, this officer was ordered to draft the wartime medal justification that every DoD civilian and military member assigned to Pentagon combat operations receives – except himself. According to the record, he was neither civilian, contractor, nor military.
Denials, road blocks, delays, all legal tactics to avoid discussion thwarted years of seeking administrative appeals through policy procedures. In JAG speak, statute of limitation ran out. In DoJ speak, they had no jurisdiction; but were willing to deny what is due through legal threats and intimidation. Army Review Board Chief claimed, even though he wanted to correct the records, his hands were tied by the DCAR (who denied tours and support to OASD-RA unless they selected his friends or promotable female majors he slept with).
Enclosed are recent letters to Defense Hierarchy copied to The Attorney’s General.
Eugene R. Zarwell (LTC~BG?)