DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
SMC
Docket No: 00112-00
8 March 2001
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:
Secretary of the Navy
Refi (a)
Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl:
20Dec99 w/attachments
(1) DD Form 149 dtd
(2) PERS-832C memo dtd
(3) PERS-311 memo dtd
(4’) Subject’s naval record
24AprOO
19MayOO
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner,
filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be
corrected by removing all reference to his nonjudicial punishment
17 December 1998, to include the punitive letter of reprimand dated 22 January 1999 and
service record page 13 (“Administrative Remarks”) entries, in light of the action to set aside
13
the NJP. Petitioner ’s command may remove from his field service
entries or other documentation relating to the NJP. The only references to the NJP in his
official headquarters record appear in the performance evaluation reports for 16 November to
15 November 1999 and 16 November to 18 December 1999 (special). Copies of these
reports are at Tabs A and B.
rtiord any page
(NJP) of
2. The Board, consisting of Mses. Davies and Humberd and Mr.
Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 8 March 2001, 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.
Swarcns, reviewed
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.
In correspondence attached as enclosures (2) and
(3), the Navy Personnel Command
offices having cognizance over the subject matter addressed in Petitioner’s application have
commented to the effect that his request has merit and warrants favorable action.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the
contents of enclosures (2) and
(3), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting
the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following
enlisted performance evaluation reports and related material:
Date of Report
Reporting Senior
28Nov99
21Dec99
Period of Report
From
To
N
N
16Nov98
16Nov99
15Nov99
18Dec99
b. That there be inserted in Petitioner
’s naval record a memorandum in place of the
removed report for 16 November 1998 to 15 November 1999, containing appropriate
identifying data concerning the report; that such memorandum state that the report has 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 report.
C. That
NO memorandum be filed to replace the removed special report for
16 November to 18 December 1999, as this report is not necessary for continuity.
d. That appropriate corrections be made to the magnetic tape or microfilm maintained
by the Navy Personnel Command.
e. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board
recommendation be corrected, removed or completely expunged from Petitioner
that no such entries or material be added to the record in the future.
’s
’s record and
f. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner
’s naval record be returned
to the Board, together with a copy of this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a
confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of
Petitioner ’s naval record.
2
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was
present at the Board ’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete
record of the Board ’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
&w+AzzL/k,
JONATHAN S.
Acting Recorder
RUSKIN
&A-4&
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised
of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the
foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by
the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
Pro&lures
- W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
3
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
IWTEDRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
5720
5420
PERS-832C
24 Apr 00
MEMORANDUM FOR'THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR)
*
Via:
PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)
Subj:
Encl:
USN,
(1) BCNR File 00112-00
(2) Petitioner's Microfiche Record
1.
The petition and naval records of subject petitioner
have been reviewed relative to his request for removal of
derogatory material.
The review reveals that the NJP of 17
2.
aside on 18
must be removed from the record.
Dee 99.
Therefore,
Dee 98 was set
all references to that NJP
Technical Advisor
Head,
Branch (PERS-832)
to the
Enlisted Performance
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
N AVY PERSONN
E L COMM
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
A N D
1610
PERS-3 11
19 May 2000
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via:
PERS/BCNR Coordinator
(PERS-OOZCB)
Subj
:
Ref (a)
BUPERSINST 1610.10 EVAL Manual
(b) Naval Personnel Command ltr 5420 PERS-832C of 24 April 2000
Encl: (1)
BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal of all references to his receiving
NJP on 17 December 1998.
2. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following:
a. A review of the member
’s headquarters record revealed the performance evaluation for the
periods 16 November 1998 to 15 November 1999 and 16 November 1999 to 18 December 1999
that documented the member receiving
NJP.
b. The member provided a letter with his petition
NJP was set-aside as of 18 December 1999 and all the member
Per reference (a), Annex S, paragraph S-12, and reference (b), the comments in the original
reports are now inappropriate.
from his Commanding Officer stating the
’s rights and privileges restored.
c. The member proves the report to be in error.
3. We recommend the following:
a. Removal of the 16 November 1998 to 15 November 1999 report and replacing it with a no
fault continuity memorandum. Deleting the bullet concerning the NJP and leaving the report in
the official record shows a decline in performance
from the last report.
b. We also recommend removal of the 16 November 1999 to 18 December 1999 Special
.
.
// 2 - m
report. By deleting the bullet concerning the “set-aside”,there is no justification for the Special
Head, Performance
Evaluation Branch
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00108-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing all reference to his nonjudicial punishment 17 December 1998, to include the punitive letter of admonition dated 22 January 1999 and service record page 13 (“Administrative Remarks”) entries, in light of the action to set aside the NJP. That Petitioner ’s naval record be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04515-00
The Board, consisting of Messrs. allegations of error and injustice on 12 October 2oo0, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. At enclosure (2) is a letter from the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) to the effect that although his NJP had been set aside, Petitioner would have to apply to this Board to have the reference to it removed from the periodic performance evaluation report in question. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05262-99
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the three enlisted performance evaluation reports for 16 July to 3 November 1998, 4 November 1998 to 3 February 1999, and 4 February to 3 May 1999. The second opinion recommended that her request be approved, stating that she would have been selected for advancement from Cycle 160,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07644-00
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC dated 15 December 2000, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice warranting removal of the remaining contested document, the Drug Disposition Recommendation dated 31 January 1981 (document 9-9). Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06683-98
The member requests removal of Based on our review of the material provided, we find the 2. following: a. However the report is developed, it represents the He suggests that the d. The member alleges that although he provided his immediate supervisor with a counseling evaluation on himself, he did not receive a formal mid-term counseling for the period in Subj: AF Mid-term counseling on performance is mandatory in question. Naval Records (BCNR) for removal of a detachment for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06967-00
PERS-832C states that he “was, in fact, convicted of DUI under a Deferred Prosecution agreement and his command had every right to document that event in his service record.” They further state “The fact that he met the required obligations, applied for and received a court dismissal of the charge two years later does not negate the incident.” They conclude that documentation supporting that significant event should remain in the record; and that maintaining such documents is essential to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04665-02
” references to NJP, rather than completely removing the was set aside, there is no indication that the marks on aits or the promotion recommendation were made solely based d. In correspondence (3), the NPC office having cognizance over mmended removing the entire contested fitness report, stating fitness report matters has r “In view of the member ’s JP being set aside, the member ’s performance trait marks and ” promotion recommendation are now considered inappropriate. ’s record. In...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00658-01
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. PERS- If 832 find the member ’s petition has merit, we have no objection to the removal of the performance evaluation in questio Head, Performance Evaluation Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND 5720 INTEDRITY DRIVE MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000 5420 PERS-832C 26 Apr 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05323-01
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report and related material: Date of Report Reporting Senior Period From of Report To 98Sep14 b. Based on that assessment, I recommend Lieutenant Commander itness report for the requested period and the Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENT LIEUTENANT COMMANDE "failure to select" be removed from her record, and that she considered by a Special Selection Board for promotion to the grade of Commander. The member...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01734-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the "Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (E1-E6)" for 16 November 1999 to 15 March 2000. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting...