MEMORANDUM FOR Mr. Bob A.

King, Concepts & Doctrine Directorate, Concepts Division, Fort

Leavenworth, KS 66027

SUBJECT: Termination During Probationary Period

1. The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you that you will be terminated from your position as
Senior Integration Analyst, GS-0301-13, and from the Federal Service effective 16 April 2010. I am
initiating this action in accordance with Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 315. The
Standard Form 50, Notification of Personnel Action, effecting termination during your probationary
period will be forwarded to you once processed.

2. This action is based on my determination that you have failed during your probationary period to
demonstrate conduct and fitness required for retention in the Federal service. Specifically,

a. You received a career conditional appointment to the position Senior Integration Analyst, on 19
January 2010. The Standard Form (SF) 50 documenting your appointment properly reflects that you
would be subject to completion of a one year initial probationary period beginning 19 January 2010
(enclosure 1).

b. A condition of Federal employment is that you conduct yourself in a professional manner that does
not bring discredit to the Army as your employer and to observe various laws and other authoritative
instructions.

c. You have consistently failed to exercise proper judgment when dealing with persons outside of this
organization. For example:

(1) On or about 22 January 2010, you had to be counseled about proper procedures for arranging
meetings with the Combined Arms Center Senior Leadership.

This refers to my attempt to setup a meeting with BG(P) Cardon, the Deputy Commandant and
Acting CAC CG. The meeting was about events and subjects that occurred over the last six months,
while working as a contractor. The subject did not pertain to CADD.

(2) On 3 February 2010, with only 12 working days on the job, and without consulting your supervisor,
you sent an e-mail to the entire doctrine development community announcing that you had been hired.
This e-mail generated multiple requests for explanation that required the direct involvement of the
Deputy Director in order to attempt to resolve.
 I sent an email of introduction to the doctrine development community. Related excerpts from my
job description:
Performs as program manager for digital conversion initiatives between TRADOC, DA Joints Chiefs of Staff and other
services, and is the functional doctrine expert on the Command's Digital Publishing Implementation Committee.
Plans, executes and manages related strategic communications and engagement plans in order to inform the Army and
community of new initiatives.
Closely coordinates with the higher headquarters to ensure agency compatibility and to recommend priorities for systems
development and implementation.
Works with HQ and proponent schools to obtain buy-in for new processes.
Works with senior management and stakeholders to define business requirements for KM.
Develop and manage related strategic communications and engagement plans to inform the Army and doctrine
developing community of new initiatives. (emphasis added)
Serves as program manager and liaison between Army and other doctrinal literature preparing agencies.
Performs advisory and liaison duties. Develops and presents TRADOC position on issues being discussed.
Coordinates with all elements by participating in joint working groups, study advisory groups, in process reviews and
other conferences and meetings to exchange data to discuss broad concepts of policy...

(3) On 26 February 2010, you sent a personal e-mail directly to the Acting CAC Commanding General
because you were unhappy about an unavoidable network outage. You sent this e-mail to the
Commanding General without complete knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the situation.
Your hasty action caused those tasked to fix the problem to divert attention away from their primary
duties to respond to your allegations that they were somehow derelict in their responsibilities, when in
fact, the exact opposite was true.

The above statement mischaracterizes the email sent to BG(P) Cardon. The issues was not that I
was "unhappy about the outage," rather the manner in which the notification was handled.

When consulted about whether my email was appropriate, BG(P) Cardon responded:

Your email was appropriate and not out off line at all. You informed the coc about an important
issue that will help us improve effectiveness and efficiency. I am a bit suprised this happening as
you were open and transparent.

(4) Shortly after your arrival in the organization, you began to discuss pre-decisional information about
the directorate's activities in publically accessible social forums.

Absent more specific information, I am unable to respond to this accusation.

(5) In February after only being in your position for a few weeks, you attended the monthly STRATCOM
meeting without notifying your supervisor. During the meeting you provided input and made
recommendations on behalf of the organization which had not been coordinated or approved by the
leadership of the organization.

Upon reporting I was instructed to work closely with Greg Goode, our KM contractor. I was also
informed that I would eventually be taking over as COR of the KM contract. Greg made me aware
of the STRATCOM meeting and I attended of my own initiative. Related excerpts from my job
description:
Plans, executes and manages related strategic communications and engagement plans in order to inform the Army and
community of new initiatives.
Develop and manage related strategic communications and engagement plans to inform the Army and doctrine
developing community of new initiatives.

d. During two counseling sessions with your immediate supervisor, you were insubordinate. When your
supervisor explained his expectations to you regarding the sharing of pre-decisional information and
later about how the 26 February 2010 incident should have been handled, your response in both cases
was "who do I need to inform that I am being told not to utilize social media" or words to that effect.

There was significant confusion resulting from the disconnect between my stated job description
and the unstated objectives of my supervisors. When I checked in, LTC Brian Ray told me to figure
out my duties based upon my job description. I had a job description in writing, he frequently gave
me verbal guidance contradictory to that job description. I requested a record copy of that guidance
to minimize future confusion. His verbal guidance was also frequently at odds with the vision and
guidance of senior leadership, specifically that of the former CAC CG, the acting CAC CG, the
TRADOC Commander and the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army.

e. On 3 March 2010, after being counseled by your supervisor, you asked one of our contractors to take
part in a closed door session with you during which time you proceeded to complain about that same
supervisor. On 17 March 2010, after another counseling session, you again asked one of your
supervisor's subordinates, this time an Army Officer, to take part in a session during which you
complained about the fact that you had again been counseled and that you were not allowed to attend
a workshop in Washington, D.C.

Absent more specific information, I am unable to respond to these accusations. Of the March 17th
event, I recall trying to find out the origin of my being excluded from the March workshop. For
several weeks I had been working on coordinating that workshop, meanwhile my chain of
command had already decided I was not going and failed to tell me. Furthermore, they requested
that I set up a private collaboration area on milBook which they failed to utilize. While I was
investing time and energy developing and promoting that collaborative area, they were conducting
"point to point" planning and coordination via email without my knowledge.

f. Between 15 March 2010 and 5 April 2010, you failed to comply with specific instructions given to you
by your supervisor regarding a project that you had been assigned. Instead of following the procedures
outlined for you in detail, you chose again to make contact with contractor personnel for whom you
were not the contracting officer's representative. As of 8 April 2010, you had still not satisfactorily
completed this initial assignment.

On March 15th, after nearly two months in the organization, I was given my initial support form.
Prior to this date, my only guidance for duties and responsibilities was my formal job description
and the varying, often contradictory, verbal guidance provided by my supervisors. Relevant portions
of my initial Senior System Civilian Evaluation Report Support Form:
Part IV
a. STATE YOUR SIGNIFICANT DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. DUTY TITLE IS:
Serves as the Senior Integration Analyst. Responsible for accomplishing complex studies and analysis of
processes and products associated with the transfer from printed media to electronic media after garnering
knowledge of doctrine development procedures and organization in order to develop and implement specific
programs assigned and approved by direct rating chain. Under supervision; plans, implements and transfers
doctrine to a digital format that can be rapidly updated (Microsoft Word files from Adobe and older Word
templates, Word files to Wiki articles and new Word templated files to Army Publishing Toolkit for Doctrine
(APT-D) files).
b. INDICATE YOUR MAJOR PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES/INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Learn current doctrine development processes, policy and procedures to include the current Microsoft Word
template.
Transfer twenty five older FMs to the new Microsoft Word template and change to Army Tactics Techniques
and Procedures.
Transfer all identified older FMs to the new Microsoft Word Template and change to Training Circulars.
Gain knowledge of CADD’s INTERNAL knowledge management needs and prepare to assume duties as
INTERNAL knowledge management officer upon the completion of the knowledge management contract.
Perform other duties as assigned by direct rating chain to include supporting other division members with
computer software and hardware needs.

I received verbal guidance that my initial priorities should be 1) transfer of the 25 FMs and 2)
transfer of the older FMs. Additionally, he explained that this would take me through June or July.
He also elaborated that he understood there would be a steep learning curve with the initial
conversions, but that I would get faster over time.

g. In March 2010, you asked your supervisor, LTC Ray, if you could participate in the CIO G6 Army Apps
Program contest. LTC Ray requested that you send him the paperwork and he would review it.
Subsequently, you submitted a request to participate in the contest. Since the contest required the work
to be done at your place of duty due to security concerns, you were required to get approval from your
supervisor. On the application, you did not provide the contact information for LTC Ray and indicated
that LTC Ray was on leave and unavailable. Not only was this an inaccurate statement but it also shows
disregard and disrespect for the chain of command.
 This statement is factually incorrect in many ways. I followed the Apps for the Army program
application instructions to the letter. Those instructions required the Director's contact information,
not that of my immediate supervisor. Supervisory permission was not required to apply for the
program, only to participate in it if selected. That decision would be made at a later date. This
statement is utterly fabricated: "Since the contest required the work to be done at your place of
duty due to security concerns, you were required to get approval from your supervisor." The contest
does not require the work to be done at place of duty, I never stated that and I never intended on
working on it during the duty day. My submission was to develop an app for the iPhone, which
requires an Apple Mac computer and proprietary software - both of which I own and have in my
home. Regarding the statement about being "on leave and unavailable," I am unable to respond to
that as I do not have access to my original email correspondence. I do have a copy of my
application which does NOT contain that wording.

3. The above incidents are indicative of a total lack of regard for the chain of command. This is serving to
create significant problems within our organization and to negatively impact our ability to accomplish
our mission with agencies and individuals outside the organization. When you have been counseled
about acceptable standards or about your inappropriate actions you proceeded to challenge your
supervisor's authority. You responded to your supervisor in a threatening manner by suggesting that you
would go around him instead of complying with his instructions. You created an uncomfortable working
environment for persons in close proximity to you by complaining to them about your supervisor. As
these actions on your part took place after repeated counseling, it is evident that you choose not to
comply with the reasonable and appropriate requests by your chain of command. This behavior is
detrimental to the efficient operation of this organization and inconsistent with the conduct expected of
persons in Federal service. Therefore, it is my decision that you be terminated during your probationary
period on 16 April 2010.

Unfortunately, my only formal interaction with Mr. Ancker was during my initial interview. That
interview, which was scheduled for 30 minutes, ended up going an hour as we had an excellent
conversation and discussed many ideas and initiatives. My next interaction with him was the
morning of April 14th, when I was asked to sign and acknowledge receipt of this letter. He made no
attempt throughout the period of my employment or today to talk to me about these issues or
obtain another perspective of the events described within this letter.

4. Your appeal rights are as follows:

a. Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulation, Section 315.806 indicates that, as a trial period employee,
you may appeal this action to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) only if you allege this action is
based on: (1) partisan political reasons (political affiliation) or marital status; or (2) race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, physical handicap, or age, if in addition to (1) above. Such appeal must be filed not
later than thirty (30) calendar days after the effective date of this action. Your appeal should be
submitted to: MSPB, Denver Field Office, 165 South Union Blvd, Suite 318, Lakewood, CO 80228-2211,
or by facsimile (303-969-5109), or electronically via the Internet (http:www.mspb.gpv).
b. I request that you send a copy of any appeal you may file to the Agency at the address listed in
paragraph 4c below.

c. To assist the MSPB in processing any appeal, you shold (sic) advise them that the Agency
Representative may be contacted at the following address/telephone numbers:

Office of the Staff Judge Advocate

Labor Law Division
415 Custer Avenue, Building 244
Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027-2313
Telephone (913) 684-4928
FAX (913) 684-3029

5. If necessary, you may contact the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center, 913-684-7434, for technical
assistance in understanding your rights in this matter or to obtain a copy of the MPSB Rules and
Regulation and appeal form.

6. You are requested to sign, date, and return the acknowledgement portion of this memorandum on
the copy provided for such purpose. Your acknowledgement of receipt does not constitute agreement
with my decision to remove you from Federal service during your probationary period, or result in the
forfeiture of any of your rights mentioned herein. Please note, however, that refusal to acknowledge
receipt in no way affects the validity of this action.

CLINTON J. ANCKER III

Director
Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate