RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2015-03970

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Letter of Admonishment (LOA) be removed from his Personnel Information File (PIF), destroyed, and not be factored in future decisions regarding his performance reports and future career opportunities.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His commander failed to follow mandatory requirements of AFI 36-2907, Unfavorable Information File (UIF) Program, by not advising him of her final decision regarding his rebuttal comments within three duty days after submission.  Additionally, the decision to keep the LOA in his PIF was decided by an improper authority.  Finally, the allegations in the LOA were proved to be erroneous.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 15 Jan 97.  

On 7 Jun 13, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with 16 years, 4 months, and 23 days of active service, and was commissioned as a first lieutenant (O-2) in the Regular Air Force, effective 8 Jun 13.

On 21 May 15, the applicant was promoted, effective this day, to the permanent grade of captain (O-3).  

On 6 Jul 15, according to documents submitted by the applicant, he received a LOA from his commander.  The reason for the LOA was that on or about 5 Jun 15, he failed to complete a short notice waiver with urgency for a deploying member leaving in nine days, yet he performed off-duty employment both 5 Jun and 8 Jun, not allowing him time to complete the waiver sooner than the allotted time.  

On 9 Jul 15, according to documents submitted by the applicant, he provide his commander with a response to the LOA.

On 16 Jul 15, according to documents submitted by the applicant, he was informed by the current commander (the commander that rendered the LOA had relinquished command), that she had reviewed his response to the LOA, and determined it appropriate to continue with the LOA as originally issued by her predecessor.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends granting the applicant’s request, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice.  A review of the applicant’s military personnel records revealed the LOA stated he would be notified of the commander’s decision regarding the LOA within 3 duty days of his rebuttal.  The commander never notified the applicant of her decision and passed the responsibility of completing the LOA to his new commander.  The applicant submitted the rebuttal to his LOA on 6 Jul 15, and was not notified of the decision to keep the LOA in his PIF until 16 Jul 15.  The final decision exceeded the three days allotted in the LOA, and was not in compliance with AFI 36-2907.

The applicant states the issuing authority was improper authority as the commanders were not over him in the chain of command.  In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2907 Paragraph 4.1. “Who Can Use Counseling, Admonitions, and Reprimands.  Commanders, supervisors, and other persons in authority can issue administrative counseling, admonitions, and reprimands.  These actions are intended to improve, correct, and instruct subordinates who depart from standards of performance, conduct, bearing, and integrity, on or off duty, and whose actions degrade the individual and unit's mission.  This includes issuing administrative counseling, admonitions, and reprimands to reservists who commit an offense while in civilian status.”  After reviewing the LOA and OPR provided, the commander issuing the LOA was the commander of the unit the applicant was assigned. 

Lastly, the applicant states the allegations are unsubstantiated by evidence.  His commander originally issued a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 23 Jun 15 with similar allegations, the allegations were proved to be erroneous and she reissued the LOA in question with largely the same allegations.  The evidence shows that the member did not commit the offenses accused of in the LOA and the commander failed to provide a preponderance of the evidence for the alleged offenses.  AFI 36-2907 Paragraph 4.1.3. “Standard of Proof.  While no specific standard of proof applies to administrative action proceedings, commanders should utilize the “preponderance of the evidence” standard when evaluating the evidence and every element of the offenses committed.  A preponderance of the evidence means simply the greater weight of credible evidence.  Whether such proof is available should be considered before initiating the administrative action.  If such proof is lacking, administrative action is susceptible to being found to be legally unsupportable and, as a result, could be set aside.  There is no requirement to prove any allegation beyond a reasonable doubt.  

They recommend removal of the LOA due to the commander’s failure to advise the individual of the final decision regarding comments submitted by the member within three duty days.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2SSM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 26 Jul 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected as indicated below.	

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Letter of Admonishment (LOA), dated 6 July 2015, be declared void and removed from his records.  

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03970 in Executive Session on 22 Sep 16, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03970 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 12 Jul 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Jul 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.