DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01262 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

 
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
   
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His  name  be  reinstated  on  the  Calendar  Year  2010A  (CY10A) 
Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB) promotion list.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
As a result of a unit climate assessment in which it was alleged 
that  he  had  made  inappropriate  sexual  comments,  his  commander 
ordered  a  Commander  Directed  Investigation  (CDI),  that 
subsequently  led  to  his  removal  from  the  promotion  list;  a 
Letter  of  Reprimand;  military  protective  order  for  another 
officer;  grounded  from  flying;  removal  from  a  Special  Access 
Program  (SAP),  and  short  notice  permanent  change  of  station 
(PCS). 
 
There was never a formal complaint filed by the officer involved 
regarding the alleged statements. 
 
Through  15  years  of  service,  he  had  a  pristine  record  to  the 
point of his removal from the promotion list.   
 
Military  informal  complaint  procedures  were  not  followed  and  a 
Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) officer was not consulted.   
 
He was the only one at his unit that was punished as a result of 
the  Commander  Directed  Investigation  (CDI);  however,  the  unit 
had multiple/considerable dysfunctions.   
 
The reviewing authority may not have had the opportunity to read 
the  character  statements  before  making  the  decision  for  his 
removal action. 
 
He was not given due process and was used as a scapegoat.  
 
In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement;  copies  of  his  AF  Form  4363,  Record  of  Promotion 
Propriety  Action,  dated  22  Jun  11;  officer  performance  report 

and  promotion  recommendation  form  and  other  supporting 
documents.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant was selected for promotion by the CY10A Lieutenant 
Colonel (Lt Col) CSB which convened on 8 Mar 10.  His projected 
promotion date was 1 Jul 11.   
 
On 28 Jun 11, the applicant’s commander recommended his name be 
removed  from  the  promotion  list.    The  specific  reason  for  this 
action  was  on  or  about  15  Jun  11,  a  CDI  disclosed  that  the 
applicant  made  deliberate  and  repeated  sexually  degrading 
comments to a female subordinate within his unit.  The applicant 
made  these  comments  in  the  presence  of  other  squadron  members.  
These comments created tension and hostility within the unit and 
had a detrimental effect upon morale.  The applicant was issued 
a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 22 Jun 11, for inappropriate 
sexual comments.  The member acknowledged receipt on 22 Jun 11.  
The rebuttal was submitted on 27 Jun 11; however, the commander 
failed  to  properly  complete  the  action.    On  22  Aug  11,  the 
Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) approved his removal from the 
CY10A Lieutenant Colonel Promotion list. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIMC recommends his LOR be removed, stating, in part, the 
commander  did  not  properly  complete  the  LOR  with  the  authority 
he  had  to  place  the  member  on  an  Unfavorable  Information  file 
(UIF).    The  LOR  was  not  processed  in  accordance  with  AFI  36-
2907, Unfavorable Information File Program.  
 
The complete AFPC/DPSIMC evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial of his request to be reinstated on 
the CY10A promotion list.  They note the governing policy states 
commanders question promotion when the preponderance of evidence 
shows  the  officer  is  not  mentally,  physically,  morally,  or 
professionally  qualified  to  perform  the  duties  of  the  higher 
grade.    Also,  early  identification  of  the  officer  and  proper 
documentation  are  essential  in  taking  promotion  propriety 
action.    Lastly,  Air  Force  policy  states  that  formal  rules  of 
evidence  do  not  apply  to  a  promotion  propriety  action.    The 
removal action was reviewed by base and Air Force legal offices 
and the action was found to be legally sufficient to warrant the 
action taken.  
 

 

2 

In  addition,  they  opine  that  a  promotion  is  not  a  reward  for 
past  service.    It's  advancement  to  a  position  of  greater 
responsibility  based  on  the  requirements  of  the  Air  Force  and 
the officer's future potential.  If an officer is not mentally, 
physically, morally, or professionally qualified to perform the 
duties in the next higher grade, it is in the best interest of 
the  Air  Force  for  the  proper  authority  to  initiate  action  to 
delay promotion, to find an officer not qualified for promotion, 
or to remove the officer from a promotion list. 
 
Based on a review of the propriety package provided to the SECAF 
for  his  review,  the  SECAF  had  the  opportunity  to  review  the 
statements provided by the applicant and his case was given due 
process. 
 
The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
Copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the 
applicant  on  19  Jun  12  for  review  and  response.    As  of  this 
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 
 
1.  The  applicant  has  not  exhausted  all  remedies  provided  by 
existing law or regulations. 
 
2.  The application was timely filed. 
 
3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  error  or  injustice  regarding  the 
applicant’s request to reinstate his name on the promotion list.  
We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging 
the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation 
primary 
responsibility, AFPC/DPSOO, and adopt its rationale as the basis 
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of 
an  error  or  injustice.    While  the  arguments  set  forth  by  the 
applicant are noted, it appears to us the applicant’s commander 
had  a  sufficient  basis  to  recommend  the  applicant’s  name  be 
removed  from  the  promotion  list.    Likewise,  it  appears  the 
Secretary  had  full  knowledge  of  the  facts  and  circumstances  of 
the applicant’s case and his decision to remove the applicant’s 
name from the list was not arbitrary or capricious.  Therefore, 
in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no 
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 
 

office 

the 

of 

of 

Air 

Force 

 

3 

4.  Notwithstanding  the  above,  it  appears  proper  administrative 
procedures  were  not  followed  in  completing  the  letter  of 
reprimand (LOR) issued to the applicant.  While issuance of the 
LOR may have been appropriate, we agree with the recommendation 
of  AFPC/DPSIMC  that  the  LOR  should  be  removed  from  the 
applicant’s  record  due  to  the  commander’s  failure  to  render  a 
final  decision  after  the  applicant  submitted  his  rebuttal.  
Therefore,  we  recommend  the  applicant’s  record  be  corrected  to 
the extent indicated below. 
 
5.  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  issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
 
The  pertinent  military  records  of  the  Department  of  the  Air 
Force  relating  to  APPLICANT,  be  corrected  to  show  that  the 
Letter of Reprimand, dated 22 June 2011, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2907, Unfavorable Information File Program, be removed. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-01262 in Executive Session on 25 September 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.    The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Mar 12, w/atchs.  
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIMC, dated 20 Apr 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 17 May 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jun 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                   Panel Chair 

 

4