RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02044
            INDEX CODE:  126.00,111.01, 131.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The following documents  be  removed  from  his  record:   Letters  of
Counseling (LOCs), dated 10 July 2000 and  20  July  2001,  Letter  of
Admonishment (LOA), dated 29 July 2002, Referral  Officer  Performance
Report (OPR) closing 10 February 2002, and an Unfavorable  Information
File (UIF).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The 10  July  2000  LOC,  written  by  someone  who  was  not  in  his
supervisory chain, falsely accuses  him  of  violating  the  chain  of
command.  The 20 July 2001 LOC falsely accuses him of working  outside
established channels.  The 29 July 2001 LOA accuses him of some  vague
charge, which no one  in  his  supervisory  chain  has  been  able  to
identify.  All of the above  falsely  accuse  him  of  misrepresenting
senior officers.  The 2002 OPR falsely states  he  had  been  formally
counseled twice for working outside established channels.  The UIF  is
based solely on the LOA, which is unsubstantiated.

In support of his request, applicant  submits  a  personal  statement,
copies of the LOCs, LOA, Referral OPR, UIF  and  additional  documents
associated with the issues cited in his contentions.  The  applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information maintained in the Military Personnel Data System  (MilPDS)
reveals  the  applicant’s  Total  Federal  Commissioned  Service  Date
(TFCSD) as 18 May 1982.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of
major, Reserve of the Air Force, with an effective date  and  date  of
rank of 18 May 1996.  Applicant’s  contested  Unfavorable  Information
File (UIF) has a  disposition  date  of  6 March  2007.   His  service
history reveals he completed a  total  of  21  years  of  satisfactory
Federal service.

During the periods under review, the applicant, a participating member
in the Air Force Reserve, was serving as  an  Individual  Mobilization
Augmentee (IMA), assigned to the  Joint  Intelligence  Center  Pacific
(JICPAC), AFELM Reserve Production Center (RPC).

The following information was extracted from applicant’s submission.

On 10 July 2000, the applicant was issued a Letter of Counseling (LOC)
by his superior [Major E. R--, USAFR]  for  “bypassing  the  chain  of
command  and   misrepresenting   management   decisions.”    Applicant
acknowledged receipt of the LOC on 1 August 2000.

On 20 August 2001, the applicant was issued  a  Letter  of  Counseling
(LOC) by his superior [Lt Col T. G---, USAFR] for bypassing the  chain
of command, in deliberate violation of the standards set forth in  the
10  Jul  00  LOC.   Applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  LOC  on
26 January 2002.  He submitted his rebuttal to the LOC on  27  January
2002, requesting the LOC be deleted.

On 29 July 2002, the applicant was issued  a  Letter  of  Admonishment
(LOA) by his superior [Cdr G. W---, USNR] for violation  of  a  lawful
order to conduct his actions via the chain of command.   Specifically,
during Nov 01-Feb 02, he circumvented the chain of command by alleging
command  support  directly  to  national   agencies   without   proper
coordination.  Applicant acknowledged receipt of the LOA  on  1 August
2002.  He submitted  his  rebuttal  to  the  LOA  on  5  August  2002,
requesting the LOA be rescinded, the two LOCs be destroyed and the UIF
be deleted.  His request for destruction of the two LOCs was denied on
12 July 2002.

On 27 December 2002, the applicant was notified  of  the  AFELM  group
commander’s [Colonel J. J---] intent to establish a UIF, with the LOA.
 He submitted a response to the UIF action on 31 January 2003.   On  7
March 2003, after  considering  all  matters  presented  to  him,  the
commander decided to established the UIF and file the LOA.

The following is a resume of the applicant’s OPR ratings subsequent to
his promotion to the grade of major.

            Period Ending    Evaluation

               10 Aug 96     Meets Standards (MS)
               10 Aug 98          MS
               10 Feb 00          MS
               10 Feb 01          MS
             * 10 Feb 02     Does Not Meet Standards

*  Contested Referral OPR
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ USAF/XOI-RE recommends the application be  denied.   XOI-RE  states
that the two Letters of Counseling  (LOC)  are  not  included  in  the
applicant’s Unfavorable Information File (UIF) established  by  JICPAC
on 27 December 2002.  The remaining documents, including the Letter of
Admonishment (LOA), contested OPR and the UIF appear to be  valid  and
appropriate records.  JICPAC/DA reviewed the applicant’s  appeal,  his
pertinent records of  performance  and  unit  records  and  finds  the
application without merit.   JICPAC/DA  states  that  the  applicant’s
history of disregarding his chain of command and military standards of
conduct are well documented.  JICPAC/DA finds the remedial steps taken
by applicant’s supervisors and JICPAC leadership were consistent  with
standard military practice.  On the basis of the comments from  JICPAC
and a review of the file, XOI-RE did not  find  material  errors  that
justify  deleting  the  requested   records.    The   HQ   USAF/XOI-RE
evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed  the  advisory  opinion  and  has  submitted  a
detailed response.  He indicated that the LOCs, although not a part of
the UIF, still remain in the Personnel Information File (PIF) kept  by
JICPAC/OOR.   Regardless  of  their  location,  they   contain   false
accusations and should be destroyed.  Despite XOI-RE’s  assurance  the
LOA appears valid, he has  provided  evidence  of  tampering,  as  his
rebuttal has been  deleted  from  the  official  file.   In  addition,
JICPAC/DA repeats  false  accusations,  providing  no  proof  that  he
violated a lawful order or acted outside the chain of command  at  any
time.  Introducing correspondence from the former AMC/IN [Colonel M---
] is similar to rumor.  The letter is not part of an  official  record
and the accusation in the former AMC/IN letter was disproved by XOI-RE
years ago.  His original statement to the Board illustrates  that  the
accusation in the LOA, on which the UIF is based, is so vague  no  one
he knows that has read it can identify the act or how  it  violated  a
lawful order.  The JICPAC  AFELM  group  commander’s  [Colonel  S---],
response provides no detail, not  even  to  identify  which  “national
agencies,” although  he  did  insert  the  word  “intelligence.”   His
assertions throughout his  letter  stretch  the  truth  and  juxtapose
events out of context.  Attempting to imply that,  in  July  2001,  he
requested a transfer only after receiving an LOC, for requesting  that
transfer, is misleading.  When compared to the actual evidence, it  is
obvious that no specific incident is identified where he acted outside
the chain of command or violated any lawful  order.   The  applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.


Applicant submitted additional information  for  the  Board’s  review,
with a copy of a letter he sent to the JICPAC  AFELM  Group  Commander
[Colonel S---], dated 8 March 2004.  The letter references the  annual
review of his UIF.  He did provide a written response to the LOA, with
the assistance  of  an  Air  Force  Area  Defense  Counsel.   A  false
statement, dated 1 October 2003, was added to the LOA claiming he  did
not respond.  However, on 5 March 2004, when the contents of  his  UIF
were inventoried, his response to the UIF was  found  stapled  to  the
original LOA.  He submits this evidence  as  further  proof  that  the
accusations leveled at him have been stretched beyond  the  truth  and
that there has been manipulation of official documents.   He  requests
the Board consider this information when  considering  his  appeal  to
have the false statements in the 2002 OPR expunged from  his  official
file.  Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit
E.

The  applicant  submitted  an  additional  statement  concerning   the
attachments to the advisory opinions, which he believes  supports  his
assertions (refer to his detailed response at Exhibit  E).   He  again
asks the Board  to  remove  the  2002  OPR  from  his  official  file.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.   After  a  thorough  review  of  the
applicant’s submission and the actions taken  against  the  applicant,
the Board majority is persuaded that relief  is  warranted.   Although
the commander may have been  within  his  discretionary  authority  in
taking the administrative actions he did in rendering  the  Letter  of
Admonishment  (LOA),  the  Unfavorable  Information  File  (UIF)   and
referral Officer Performance Report (OPR), the Board majority believes
the  applicant  has  created  sufficient  doubt  as  to  whether   the
administrative actions were adequately justified.   In  this  respect,
the Board majority finds the accusations against the applicant  to  be
nebulous; therefore, the basis for the LOA is, in the Board majority’s
view,  questionable.   During  the  period  under  review,  the  Board
majority noted the efforts made by the applicant  to  go  through  his
immediate superiors but, because of  diverse  management  styles,  may
have upset senior members with  his  aggressiveness  in  accomplishing
assigned tasks.  Although some guidance was  provided,  the  available
evidence does not establish, to  the  Board  majority’s  satisfaction,
that the  applicant  intentionally  failed  to  comply  with  existing
requirements considering the circumstances at the time.  The applicant
appears to have acted as responsibly  and  appropriately  as  possible
given the guidance available to him at that time.   In  addition,  the
Board majority noted that, prior to  the  service  under  review,  the
applicant’s 18 plus years of service were outstanding.  In  the  Board
majority’s opinion, the applicant’s overall duty performance outweighs
the misunderstandings that transpired.   The Board  majority  believes
the benefit of the doubt should be resolved in favor of the  applicant
and voiding the LOA seems warranted.  Since the UIF and  the  referral
OPR were driven by the LOA, which was found  to  be  unwarranted,  the
Board majority also recommends the UIF and referral OPR be voided  for
consistency’s sake.  Inasmuch as the Board  majority  is  recommending
removal of the referral OPR, equity dictates that the applicant should
be afforded Special Selection  Board  (SSB)  promotion  consideration.
With regard to the applicant’s request for removal of the  Letters  of
Counseling (LOCs), dated 10 July 2000 and 20 July  2001,  although  it
has been determined that the LOCs were not included in the  UIF,  they
may still be on file in his Personnel Information File (PIF).  Due  to
the circumstances surrounding the events during that time  frame,  the
Board majority believes the LOCs  should  also  be  removed  from  the
applicant’s  records  since  doubt  has  been  raised  concerning  the
accusations.  In view of the foregoing, the Board majority  recommends
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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

      a.  The Letters of Counseling, dated 10 July  2000  and  20 July
2001; the Letter of Admonishment, dated 29 July 2002, and  Unfavorable
Information File Action established as a result of the  LOA,  and  any
and all references thereto, be declared  void  and  removed  from  his
records.

      b.  The Field Grade Officer Performance Report,  AF  Form  707A,
rendered for the period 11 February 2001 through 10 February 2002, and
all referral documents attached thereto, be declared void and  removed
from his records.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by  a  Special  Selection  Board  for  the
Fiscal  Year  2003  (V0503B)  Air  Force  Reserve  Line   and   Health
Professions Lieutenant Colonel  Selection  Board  and  any  subsequent
boards for which the OPR closing 10 February  2002  was  a  matter  of
record.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 1 April 2004, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
              Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member

By a majority vote, Messrs. Hinton and Lineberger recommended granting
the relief sought in this application.  Ms. Maust voted  to  deny  the
applicant's request but did not desire to submit  a  minority  report.
The following documentary evidence was considered in  connection  with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02044.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ USAF/XOI-RE, dated 26 Sep 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letters from applicant, dated 18 Dec 03, w/atchs,
                   9 Mar 04, w/atch, and 24 Mar 04.




                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2003-02044




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

            a.  The Letters of Counseling, dated 10 July 2000 and
20 July 2001; the Letter of Admonishment, dated 29 July 2002, and
Unfavorable Information File Action established as a result of the
LOA, and any and all references thereto, be, and hereby are, declared
void and removed from his records.

            b.  The Field Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form
707A, rendered for the period 11 February 2001 through 10 February
2002, and all referral documents attached thereto, be, and hereby are,
declared void and removed from his records.

      It is further directed that he be considered for promotion to
the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the
Fiscal Year 2003 (V0503B) Air Force Reserve Line and Health
Professions Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board and any subsequent
boards for which the OPR closing 10 February 2002 was a matter of
record.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency