IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  2 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140012654 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests removal of his relief-for-cause (RFC) officer evaluation report (OER) for the period 21 August 2010 through 10 October 2010 from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  The RFC OER needs to be removed from his military record.  He thought it would have been removed from his records when his case was resolved with the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR).  This case made him whole for any and all monies taken from him in regard to the Army Regulation 
15-6 (Procedures for Investigating Officers and Boards of Officers) investigation which generated the RFC OER and the subsequent Financial Liability Investigation of Property Loss (FLIPL) that was processed against him.

	b.  His military records were to be corrected to show the Army Regulation 
15-6 investigation and FLIPL were not processed accordingly.  The findings and recommendations of the Department of the Army G-4 stated he had followed orders and secured the equipment per the guidance he was given.

	c.  The G-4 further stated he was not the proximate cause of the loss of this equipment and his actions were what a reasonably prudent person would do.

	d.  The RFC OER states he was derelict in his duties and this was the proximate cause of this loss.  This has been proven false by the G-4 opinion that was given to the Board and the Board's findings to correct his military records and made him whole for all monies that were collected.  As per the Board's recommendation, he was to be granted full relief.  He received the monies, but was under the belief that the RFC OER would be removed from his records and replaced with a memorandum for the nonrated time.  He is only asking for justice and a correction of the injustice that he was subjected to through this whole ordeal.

	e.  He believes he was personally singled out by his command as a way to direct attention from the toxic environment and the numerous illegal activities that were prevalent.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of ABCMR Docket Number AR20120002976, dated 15 November 2012.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is currently serving as a captain in the Regular Army.

2.  The contested RFC OER covers the period 21 August 2010 through 10 October 2010.  In Part Va (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Performance During the Rating Period and His Potential for Promotion), the rater placed an "X" in the "Other" box and entered the following comments in Part Vb (Comment on Specific Aspects of the Performance):

[Applicant] has been relieved as a result of his dereliction of the performance of his duties as medical platoon leader.  [Applicant] failed to enforce property security and accountability within his platoon.  This negligence in execution led to the loss of two sensitive items.  [Applicant] has shown limited managerial skills and lacks initiative.

3.  In Part VIIa (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Promotion Potential to the Next Higher Grade), the senior rater placed an "X" in the "Do Not Promote" box and entered the following comments in Part VIIc (Comment on Performance/Potential):

Pursuant to an [Army Regulation] 15-6 investigation into the loss of a Medical Platoon Simple Key Loader (SKL) and Defense Advanced [Global Positioning System] Receiver (DAGR), [Applicant] was relieved of his duties as Medical Platoon Leader for dereliction in the performance of his duties in failing to properly secure his platoon's sensitive items.  The relief was directed by the 3/1 AD (IBCT) [3rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division] Brigade Commander.  [Applicant] has limited potential for promotion or continued service in the Army.

4.  In April 2011, following an investigation of property loss, the applicant and two Soldiers were found to be financially responsible for the loss of the SKL and DAGR in the amount of $2,456.01.

5.  In February 2012, the applicant applied to the ABCMR and requested correction of his military records to show he was not liable for the loss of government property.

6.  In April 2012, an advisory opinion was received from the Department of the Army Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4.  Based on procedural flaws, that office recommended reversal of the financial liability assessed, reimbursement of $2,456.01 or all monies deducted from the applicant's pay as a result of the FLIPL, and correction of his records.

7.  In November 2012, the ABCMR corrected his military records to show he was not found financially liable for the $2,456.01 as indicated in the FLIPL and recommended reimbursement of any monies already collected from his pay.

8.  A review of the restricted section of his OMPF on the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) revealed a copy of the RFC OER in question.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records Management) prescribes Army policy for the creation, utilization, administration, maintenance, and disposition of the OMPF.  It states the purpose of the OMPF is to preserve permanent documents pertaining to enlistment, appointment, duty stations, assignments, training, qualifications, performance, awards, medals, disciplinary actions, insurance, emergency data, separation, retirement, casualty, administrative remarks, and any other personnel actions.  OER's are required for filing in iPERMS.

10.  Army Regulation 623-3 (Evaluation Reporting System) states an evaluation report accepted for inclusion in the official record of a rated Soldier's OMPF is presumed to be administratively correct, to have been prepared by the proper rating officials, and to represent the considered opinion and objective judgment of the rating officials at the time of preparation.  The burden of proof rests with the applicant.  Accordingly, to justify deletion or amendment of a report, the applicant must produce evidence that establishes clearly and convincingly that:  (1) the presumption of regularity referred to in paragraphs 3-39 and 6-7 should not be applied to the report under consideration and (2) action is warranted to correct a material error, inaccuracy, or injustice.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The RFC OER states the applicant was relieved as a result of his dereliction of the performance of his duties, he failed to enforce property security and accountability within his platoon, and this negligence led to the loss of two sensitive items.

2.  In April 2012 based on procedural flaws in the investigation, the Department of the Army G-4 recommended reversal of the financial liability assessed, reimbursement of $2,456.01 or all monies deducted from the applicant's pay as a result of the FLIPL, and correction of his records.

3.  In November 2012, the ABCMR corrected his military records to show he was not found financially liable for the $2,456.01 as indicated in the FLIPL and recommended reimbursement of any monies already collected from his pay.

4.  Since it appears the RFC OER was generated from the flawed investigation, it would be appropriate to expunge the contested OER from the restricted section of the applicant's OMPF.

BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by 


expunging the OER for the period 21 August 2010 through 10 October 2010 from his OMPF and replacing it with a memorandum for the nonrated time.



      _____________X____________
                  CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140012654



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140012654



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1