RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-00910

XXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

1.  The Letters of Counseling (LOCs) dated 9 Aug 18, 5 Oct 18, and 23 Oct 18; the Letters of Reprimand (LORs) dated 17 Dec 18 and 1 Apr 19; and the Control Roster and Unfavorable Information File (UIF), dated 1 Apr 19 be removed from his records.

2.  His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 1 Feb 18 thru 31 Jan 19 be removed from his military records. 

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He believes that his leadership created a hostile work environment and that he experienced retaliation because of an Inspector General (IG) complaint filed against the Child Development Center (CDC) due to incidents that occurred with his son’s treatment.  In addition, there were extenuating circumstances involving his wife’s medical problems during the reporting period.  Furthermore, he filed an Equal Opportunity (EO) complaint for experiencing a hostile work environment and the allegations were found substantiated by EO; however, the base legal office reviewed the findings and found them to be legally insufficient.  Consequently, the complaint was forwarded to his vice wing commander for final determination, who ultimately found the EO findings to be unsubstantiated.  He believes that a conflict of interest existed with the vice wing commander’s ruling, because he was also involved with his Central Registry Board (CRB) determination.  As such, all of the adverse actions should be reversed and removed from his records. 

In support of his application, he provides a 10-page letter to the Board explaining the events that led to the hostile work environment and unjust adverse actions.  In addition, he provides five attachments including “End of Course” surveys from his students who evaluated him on his performance as a military training instruction and four character reference letters. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a Regular Air Force staff sergeant (E-5).

According to documents submitted in the form of a complaint to the Inspector General’s office (IG) and provided by the IG office:
	
	On 9 Aug 18, the applicant was issued a LOC for failing to follow directions by identifying a third point of contact to alleviate his CDC issues and updating his emergency contact information with the CDC.  In addition, he failed to inform his supervisor when he left work early to pick up his son from the CDC.  

According to AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), the applicant received an annual evaluation for period of report 1 Feb 18 thru 31 Jan 19.  For this period the applicant received a rating of “Met some but not all expectations” in every section of the evaluation and a “Not Ready Now” promotion recommendation by his commander. 

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denying the applicant’s request to remove the three LOCs, the two LORs, the UIF and the control roster from his military human resource record (MHRR).  In accordance with AFI 36-2907, Unfavorable Information File, Paragraph 4.1. The commander and supervisor has authority to issue a Letter of Counseling and a Letter of Reprimand and in accordance with paragraph 4.1.3 there is no requirement to prove any allegation beyond a reasonable doubt.  Furthermore, the applicant failed to address what the LORs and LOCs were issued for and did not provide copies of any of the documents in question.  

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denying the applicant’s request to void the applicant’s EPR.  While the applicant exhausted his administrative remedies by filing an Evaluation Review Appeal Board (ERAB) application, the request to void the EPR was denied, as the evidence did not substantially challenge the presumption of the original evaluation’s objectivity and accuracy.  The contested EPR reflects ratings of “Met some but not all expectations” and a promotion recommendation of “Not ready now,” but the report is not a referral as there are no derogatory comments nor was a referral memorandum attached to the report.  In addition, evaluations are presumed to be accurate and objective unless an applicant provides evidence to overcome this presumption beyond a reasonable doubt.  As such, the applicant has provided insufficient evidence to substantiate an error or injustice as it pertains to the contested evaluation.  

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 27 Jul 20 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSM and AFPC/DP3SP and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board notes, that the contested documents were not available in the applicant’s military human resource record, nor did the applicant provide copies of said documents.  In addition, there appears to be no error or injustice in the administering of the corrective actions or the evaluation.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2020-00910 in Executive Session on 04 Nov 20:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 8 Jan 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 6 Apr 20.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 26 Jul 20.
Exhibit E:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 27 Jul 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings pertaining to Docket Number BC-2020-00910, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.