DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Y

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

BJG
Docket No: 1887-99
19 November 1999

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:

Secretary of the Navy

.

*

Subj 

:

Ref:

Encl:

FC2(S
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD

USN

(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

(1) DD Form 149 dtd 24 Feb 99 w/attachments
(2) PERS-311 memo dtd 30 Aug 99
(3) PERS-601 memo dtd 3 Nov 99
(4) Memo for record dtd 17 Nov 99
(5) Subject’s naval record

1. Pursuant to reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1)
with this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by removing his service record page
13 (“Administrative Remarks”) dated 18 December 1997, and modifying his performance
evaluation report for 13 June 1997 to 15 March 1998, copies of which are in enclosure (1) at
Tabs A and B, respectively. Regarding the evaluation, he specifically requested changing the
physical readiness test (PRT) code in block 20, “physical readiness,” from 
to 
fat standards]. 
in block 36, “military bearing/ character, 
- individual,” be
lowest. Finally, he requested that block 45,  “promotion recommendation 
” the third best, to  “must promote,” the second best. Paragraph
changed from  “promotable, 
3.e below reflects he later amended his requests, regarding the marks in blocks 36 and 45,
from modification to removal, and requested filing a memorandum to explain their absence.

“F” (failed PRT)
“M/WS [within height/weight or body
” He also requested that his mark of “2.0” (“progressing”), the second lowest,
” be changed to “3.0” (“meets standards”), the third

“M” 

(PRT medically waived), so the entry will read 

2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Flood and Mses. Hardbower and Moidel, reviewed
Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 18 November 1999, and pursuant to its
regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the
enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations
of error and injustice, finds as follows:

,

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies

available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b. The only unfavorable matter in the performance evaluation in question is the

contested PRT entry in block 20.

c.

In correspondence attached as enclosure 

(2), the Navy Personnel Command 

(NIX)

(PERS-311) has commented to the effect that Petitioner
Performance Evaluation Branch 
original request to modify his evaluation warranted partial approval. They recommended
modifying blocks 20 and 36 as Petitioner originally requested, on the basis that he had
provided documentation indicating he should have been medically waived from the PRT, but
they concluded he had not provided sufficient justification for changing his promotion
recommendation. They stated  “The promotion recommendation is at the discretion of the
reporting senior and is not required to be consistent with the trait average or  other
recommendations. 

”

’s

d.

In correspondence attached as enclosure 

(3), the NPC Navy Drug and Alcohol,

Fitness, Education, and Partnerships Division 
Petitioner ’s request to remove his page 13, which documents his failure of the PRT, has merit
and warrants favorable action.

(PERS-601) has commented to the effect that

e. The memorandum for the record at enclosure (4) shows Petitioner amended his
request regarding the marks in blocks 36 and 45 of his evaluation, from modification to
removal. He also clarified that he wanted a memorandum placed in his record to account for
the absence of the marks.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of
an injustice warranting full approval of Petitioner

’s request, as amended.

The Board concurs with PERS-3 11 in finding that block 20 of his performance evaluation
should be modified to show he was medically waived from the PRT. They further agree that
corrective action regarding block 36 is justified, since the mark. in this block would have been
affected by the PRT failure. Since Petitioner now requests removal of the mark, rather than
modification, and the evidence does not establish what mark the reporting senior would have
i,f Petitioner had been waived from the PRT, the Board concludes that removing the
assigned 
mark is 
ihe proper remedy.

Contrary to the PERS-3 11 opinion, the Board finds removal of the block 45 promotion
recommendation is warranted as well. They consider it apparent that the PRT failure
influenced the promotion recommendation, particularly noting that the evaluation reflects no
other unfavorable information. As Petitioner now requests removal of the recommendation,
rather than modification, and the evidence does not show what the recommendation would
have been if he had been waived from the PRT, the Board finds that removing the
recommendation is appropriate.

.

2

The Board agrees with Petitioner that if the marks in blocks 36 and 45 are removed, a
memorandum should be placed in his record to account for their absence.

The Board concurs with PERS-601 in concluding that the page 13 should be removed.

In view of the above, the Board recommends the following corrective action:

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by modifying his enlisted performance
evaluation report for 13 June 1997 to 15 March 1998, signed by Lieutenant Commander S.
M. Sundt, USN, and dated 9 April 1998, as follows:

(1) Block 20 ( “physical readiness ”): Change the PRT code from 
entry as corrected will read 

”
“M/WS. 

.

“F” to “M, 

”  so the

(2) Block 36 ( “military bearing/character ”): Delete 

no mark in this block.

“X” from  “2.0” column, leaving

(3) Block 45 ( “promotion recommendation  

- individual ”): Delete 

“promotable ” column, leaving 

no mark in this block.

“X” from

b. That there be inserted in Petitioner ’s naval record a memorandum, containing

appropriate identifying data; that such memorandum state that the marks in blocks 36 and 45
of Petitioner ’s enlisted performance evaluation report for 13 June 1997 to 15 March 1998
have been removed by order of the Secretary of the Navy in accordance with the provisions
of federal law and may not be made available to selection boards and other reviewing
authorities; and that such boards may not conjecture or draw any inference as to the nature of
the removed marks.

C. That appropriate correction be made to the magnetic tape or microfilm maintained by

the Navy Personnel Command.

d. That Petitioner ’s service record page 13 ( “Administrative Remarks ”) dated

18 December 1997 be removed.

e. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board ’s

recommendation be corrected, removed or completely expunged from Petitioner ’s record and
that no such entries or material be added to the record in the future.

f. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner ’s naval record be returned

a copy of this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a
for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of

to the Board, together with
confidential file maintained
Petitioner 

s naval record.
’ 

3

4.
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board
the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board
matter.

’s review and deliberations, and that
’s proceedings in the above entitled

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder

Acting Recorder

5. The foregoing report of the Board is submitted for your review, and action.

Reviewed and approved:

Charles L. Tompkins
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy
(Personnel Programs)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVY  
5720 
YlLLlWDTOlT112805

PIRSOWWEL  COMMAND

IWTEDRITY  DRIVE

 5-0000

1610
PERS-311
30 AUG 99

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOXCB)

Subj:

FC2

USN,.

Ref:

(a) BUPERSINST 1610.10, EVAL Manual

Encl:

(1) BCNR File

Enclosure (1) is returned.

The member requests modification
1.
to his performance report for the period 13 June 1997 to 15 March
1998.

Based on our review of the material provided, we find the

2.
following:

a.

A review of the member's digitized record revealed the

report in question to be on file.
The member signed the report
indicating his desire not to submit a statement.
Per reference
(a), the member has two years from the ending date of the report
to submit a statement if desired.
received from the member.

A statement has not been

b.

A further review of the member's digitized record

Per reference (a), Annex P, paragraph P-4, the original

revealed a letter-supplement for the report in question to be on
file.
reporting senior may submit supplementary material within two
years. after the
reporting senior, LCD
did not sign the letter-supplement
on file; therefore, the letter-supplement is invalid.
We have
administratively removed the letter-supplement from the member's
digitized record.

ending date of the report.

The original

C .

The member states that the report for the period in

question was submitted in error due to not being medically
capable of taking the PRT.
year to be seen by an orthopedic surgeon.
with his petition a Standard Form 600
which supports his allegation.
"Physical Readiness",
"F/WS"; block 36,

The member provides
, MC, USA,
The member feels that block 20,

"Military Bearing/Character" should be changed

The member alleges that it took a

should be changed to read  

"M/WS"  vice

fro

Subj: FC

to read "3.0" vice  
Recommendation"
"Promotable".

"2.0", and block 45, "Individual Promotion
should be changed to read "Must Promote" vice

d.

We feel that the member does provide justification for

changing blocks 20 and 36,
justification for changing his promotion recommendation.
promotion recommendation is
senior and is not required to be consistent with the trait
average or other recommendations.

The
at the discretion of the reporting

but does not provide sufficient

3.

Based on the above findings,

we recommend the following:

(1) Change block 20, "Physical Readiness" to read  

"F/WS".

"M/WS"  vice

(2) Change block 36,

,,3.0"  vice  

-2.0".

"Military Bearing/Character" to read

Head, Performance
Evaluation Branch

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

MILLINGTON  TN 380550000

6110
PERS-601
3 Nov 99

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-OOZCB)

Subj:

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF
PETTY OFFICER

Ref:

(a) BCNR File 01887-99 w/Service record

Based on our review of reference (a),

1.
13 is justified.
waived during the PRT conduct

Petty 

Offic

removal of members page

should have been medically

Recommend removal of page  

2.
record.

;3 from Petty Office

service

3.
be reached at

PERS-601's point of contact
r

who can

b.S. Navy

Captain, 
Director, Navy Drug 
Fitness, Education, and
Partnerships Division (PERS-60)

& Alcohol,

_____-___~

__________I_________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SUITE 2432

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX, 
WASHINGTON
coMMERcIA
FAX: (703) 61
m-s-
DATE: 
CASE DOCKET
(P
PETITIONER 
PARTY CALLED.
TELEPHONE NO
I
WHAT I SAID: 
PEER COMPARISON REMOVED IN HIS CONTESTED EVAL VICE IMPROVING THE
MARKS AND PEER COMPARISON. I ALSO ASKED HIM IF HE WANTED A MEMO
FILED IN HIS RECORD EXPLAINING THE MODIFICATIONS TO HIS EVAL
WHAT PARTY SAID: PET INFORMED ME THAT HE DID WANT THE MARKS AND
PER COMPARISON REMOVED AND A MEMO FILED IN HIS RECORD.

D WHETHER OR NOT PET WANTED THE MARKS AND

17NOV99

,.

, USN

. ,