Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016407
Original file (20140016407.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		
		BOARD DATE:	  12 November 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140016407 


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 two sets of documents (Department of the Army (DA) Board, 2013-06-06 and Elimination Action, 2013-06-06) containing unfavorable information which are posted in the restricted portion of her official military personnel file (OMPF).

2.  The applicant states the documents pertain to a Show Cause Elimination Board that was never conducted and administratively closed as of 6 June 2013.  The show cause action was initiated by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) for derogatory information located in a referred Officer Evaluation Report (OER).  As of 13 May 2013, HRC Appeals and Corrections Branch declared the above-mentioned OER void and directed removal of the report from her OMPF; therefore, the elimination board process was canceled.  The petitioned documents both reference the voided evaluation report and the second batch contains an actual copy of the voided evaluation, which was directed to be completely removed from her records.  However, because of the restricted posting of the documents the evaluation is still in her records.  Because these documents contain unfavorable information that has already been adjudicated through proper HRC channels, she requests immediate removal of these OMPF entries.  As has already been determined by HRC, the presence of this information is unjust and creates an inaccurate unfavorable image.

3.  The applicant provides:

* referred OER for the period 1 July through 1 September 2011
* applicant's memorandum for record, subject:  Comments in Correction of Referred OER for [Applicant]
* HRC memorandum, subject: Initiation of Elimination
* applicant's memorandum to HRC, subject:  Acknowledgment of Receipt of Officer Elimination Initiation Memorandum
* HRC memorandum, subject:  Evaluation Report Appeal (20110701-20110901) 
* HRC memorandum for record, subject:  Nonrated Statement 
* Officer Record Brief  
* U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School memorandum, subject:  Request to Terminate Initiation of Elimination – [Applicant]
* HRC memorandum, subject:  Closing of Show Cause Action – [Applicant]
* two rating schemes
* two DA Forms 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Actions (FLAG))
* request to the DA Suitability Evaluation Board for removal of the documents listed above
* DA Suitability Evaluation Board response 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was serving in the Regular Army in the rank of captain at the time of her request.

2.  Her records maintained in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) contain an HRC memorandum, subject:  Closing of Show Cause Action – [Applicant] under the title "Board of Inquiry, Corresp Special Sel, Prom Adv, Prom Rev, Stby Adv Board."

3.  iPERMS also contains 14 pages of documents under the title "DA Directed Elimination Action."  These documents include an HRC memorandum, subject: Initiation of Elimination, dated 15 March 2013, informing the applicant that she was identified to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges).  The action was based on substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a referred OER for the period 1 July through 1 September 2011, which was filed in her OMPF, and conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the above-referenced item.  The other documents included under this title are:

* a referred OER for the period 1 July through 1 September 2011
* a memorandum for record, dated 7 November 2011, wherein she stated the OER in question contained administrative errors and extremely inaccurate ratings and remarks
* a DA Form 268 initiating flagging action effective 15 March 2013 and a second one removing flagging action effective 6 June 2013
* her memorandum to HRC, subject:  Acknowledgment of Receipt of Officer Elimination Initiation Memorandum
* HRC memorandum, subject:  Evaluation Report Appeal (20110701-20110901) stating based on the evidence she submitted, her OER for the period stated was removed from her official file
* HRC memorandum for record, subject:  Nonrated Statement; dated 13 May 2013, stating that her OER for the period 1 July through 1 September 2011 was void and the period was declared nonrated
* Officer Record Brief  
* U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School memorandum, subject:  Request to Terminate Initiation of Elimination – [Applicant]
* HRC memorandum, subject:  Closing of Show Cause Action – [Applicant]
* two rating schemes

4.  Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) prescribes policies and procedures regarding unfavorable information considered for placement in and, when appropriate, removal from official personnel files.  This regulation states the Army policy is to ensure that unsubstantiated unfavorable information is not placed in personnel files or used for personnel decisions.  Additional objectives are to protect the rights of individual Soldiers and, at the same time, permit the Army to consider all available relevant information when choosing Soldiers for positions of leadership, trust, and responsibility and to provide a means to remedy injustices if they occur.  

5.  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 that once placed in the OMPF, a document becomes a permanent part of that file.  The document will not be removed from the OMPF or moved to another part of the OMPF unless directed by competent authority.

6.  Army Regulation 623-3 prescribes the policies for completing evaluation reports that support the Evaluation Reporting System.  It states in the case of an invalidated evaluation report, a memorandum will be placed in the performance portion of the OMPF declaring the period as nonrated time.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

The available evidence shows the referred OER was directed to be removed from her records.  The related DA elimination action and DA board of inquiry were closed without action.  As such, it would be appropriate to remove the related documents from her OMPF with the exception of the HRC memorandum for record, subject:  Nonrated Statement, dated 13 May 2013.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___X_____  __X______  __X__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by removing from her OMPF all documents contained under the titles of "Board of Inquiry, Corresp Special Sel, Prom Adv, Prom Rev, Stby Adv Board" and "DA Directed Elimination Action," with the exception of the HRC memorandum for record, subject:  Nonrated Statement, dated 13 May 2013.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to removal from her OMPF of the HRC memorandum for record, subject:  Nonrated Statement, dated 13 May 2013.


      _______ _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)                                         AR20140016407



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140016407



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016684

    Original file (20110016684.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel requests that, if necessary, new orders be issued authorizing the applicant's wear of the SF Tab. The orders cited Army Regulation 600-8-22, paragraph 1-31(c)(9)(c) and f) as authority for revoking the applicant's SF Tab. It appears counsel did not correctly read that portion of the authority line containing "(e and f)" based on counsel's statement that "the criteria of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Interim Change), paragraph 1-31(c)(9) (c and f) were not satisfied at the time Orders...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014333

    Original file (20140014333.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her record contains the contested memorandum 2, a memorandum for the Office of the DCoS, G-1, dated 21 August 2013, subject: Show Cause Recommendation - The Applicant, from LTG JWT, CDR, USARC. The U.S. Army Human Resources Command's (HRC) website contains a video script, dated 15 May 2015, subject: Selection Board Process Script, wherein MAJ CW, a board recorder for DA selection boards stated, in part: a. HQDA convenes approximately 80 selection boards each year. Also in accordance with...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021672

    Original file (20130021672.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). c. An email from ATRRS, dated 13 August 2013, wherein she was notified of receipt of her reservation for the CCC with a start date of 9 June 2014. d. OSRB ROP, dated 8 September 2013, wherein the board directed the removal of the OER covering the period 18 July 2011 through 17 July 2012 from the applicant's OMPF, a memorandum be inserted in her OMPF announcing the period as non-rated time, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015877

    Original file (20140015877.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests removal of a general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR) and any associated documents from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant states: * she received a GOMOR and a referred officer evaluation report (OER) (hereafter referred to as the contested OER) for the period 11 May 2013 through 10 May 2014 due to an unsubstantiated informal equal opportunity (EO) complaint filed against her * she was not selected for promotion to chief warrant officer...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002084

    Original file (20150002084.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Specifically, Department of the Army (DA) memorandum 600-2 (Policies and Procedures for Active Duty List Officer Selection Boards), paragraphs 7 and 8 directs the board to consider specific criteria for selection. Regarding the second administrative error, according to Army Regulation 623-3, paragraph 4-8(b) her appeal was timely submitted within three years of the through date of the contested OER. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021703

    Original file (20140021703.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests the following: * removal of the DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the period 1 August 2011 through 31 July 2012 (hereafter referred to as the contested OER) from his official military personnel file (OMPF) * deletion of the administrative elimination action initiated by the Commanding General (CG), U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) * amendment of the whistleblower Inspector General (IG) complaint filed on 26 September 2012 * restoration of his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012756

    Original file (20110012756.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Part V (Performance and Potential Evaluation (Rater)) the following entries are noted in: (1) Part Va (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Performance During the Rating Period and His/Her Potential for Promotion), the rater placed an "X" in the "Unsatisfactory Performance – Do Not Promote" block. His record contains the third contested OER and rebuttal to the OER covering the rating period 9 February and 4 June 2008, a change-of-rater OER for his performance of duty as the Training Officer. Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021871

    Original file (20120021871.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In addition to the applicant's request for a discharge upgrade, counsel requests the following: * change of the applicant's separation authority, separation code, and narrative reason for separation to hardship or Secretarial authority * remove or redact his DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Reports (OER)) for the periods 27 July 2008 through 31 October 2008 and 1 November 2008 through 30 October 2009 * promote the applicant to CPT retroactive to 19 August 2009 2. Counsel states: * the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150011627

    Original file (20150011627.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Statement of Relevant Facts: * the applicant has served his country honorably in an active duty status for over 12 years * his first period of active service was in 1990 after transitioning from the U.S. Air Force (USAF) Reserve Officers' Training Corps * In 1991 he entered the inactive Ready Reserve and remained there as he pursued his medical degree * after receiving financial assistance from the USAF, he entered active duty with the USAF as a psychiatrist in 2001; he was released from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011948

    Original file (20100011948.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While on active duty, the applicant appealed, in two separate requests, to the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) for relief, requesting removal of the reprimand and Relief for Cause OER from his OMPF. The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant received a reprimand for misconduct and that it was filed in his OMPF. With respect to his subsequent appeals to the DASEB to remove the reprimand and/or the OER, the available evidence shows the DASEB considered and...