DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
CORRECTION OF   N AV AL 

 

OARD FOR

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

RECORDS

HD:hd
Docket No: 06294-02
13 January 2003

From:
To:

Subj:

Refi

Encl:

Chairman,

Board f r Correction of Naval Records

b

(a)
(1)
(a)
(3)
(4)

DD Form 149 td 3 
PERS-OOH me

JulO2 w/attachments

1. Pursuant to the provisic
filed enclosure (1) with this
corre&ed by removing the 
f
at Tab A.

s of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner,
kuud requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be
tress report for 1 February to 22 April 2002, a copy of which is

2. The Board, consisting o
allegations of error and inju:
correcti\
determined that the 
evidence of record. Docum
a~
enclosures, naval records, 

Messrs. Cooper, Frankfurt and Pfeiffer, reviewed Petitioner’s
ice on 9 January 2003, and pursuant to its regulations,
: action indicated below should be taken on the available
~tary material considered by the Board consisted of the
i applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

revit
3. The Board, having  
of error and injustice, rinds

ved all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations
s follows:

a. Before applying to
available under existing law

lis Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies
nd regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b. Petitioner contends
fc
senior as a punitive action 
procedures (SOP) involved 
d
direct contradiction to 
offici;
General and a Field Naval E
Nava!
violated the Bureau of 
substitute for appropriate 
co]
findings.

re adverse fitness report at issue was submitted by the reporting
an alleged intentional violation of squadron operating
rring a flight mishap; that the reporting senior’s allegation is in
findings of investigations of the mishap by 
,the Judge Advocate
aluation Board; and that the punitive use of the fitness report
Personnel instruction restricting use of adverse reports as a
ective actions or as a means to contradict official investigative

c.

In correspondence .

ttached as enclosure 

(NPC)
office having cognizance o Navy equal opportunity matters stated that they did not find
any allegation or eviden
sex, or religion as 
describ
recommendation for the 
di

nlawful discrimination based on race, 
n the Navy Equal Opportunity Manual. They provided no
sition of this case.

(2), the Navy Personnel Command 

ethnic@, national origin,

d. In correspondence
fitness report matters has c
warrants favorable action.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consider
(3),
contents of enclosure 
following corrective actio

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner ’s

fitness report and rel

hed as enclosure 

(3), the NPC office having cognizance over

mented to the effect that Petitioner ’s request has merit and

n of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the
Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the

record be corrected by removing therefrom the following

Date of Report

Reporting Senior

Period of Report
From
To

02May30

CDR

SN

02FebOl

02Apr22

b. That there be inse
removed report containin
memorandum state that
accordance with the 
proves
reviewin
boards and other 
inference as to the nature

in Petitioner ’s naval record a memorandum in place of the
ropriate identifying data concerning the report; that the
rt has been removed by order of the Secretary of the Navy in

s of federal law and may not be made available to selection
thorities; and that such boards may not conjecture or draw any

C. That any m
recommendation be 
that no such entries

correc

entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board
removed or completely expunged from Petitioner

to the record in the future.

’s

’s record and

d. That any material
to the Board, together with
confidential file maintained
Petitioner ’s naval record.

 

t

rected to be removed from Petitioner ’s naval record be returned
copy of this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a
lr such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of

2

4. Pursuant to Section 
Records (32 Code of
present at the Board ’
record of the Board ’sp

6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval
lations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was
and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete
ings in the above entitled matter.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder

5. Pursuant to the
the Board for Correction
723.6(e)) and having
foregoing corrective
the Board on behalf of the

@$&/W&Kc& 
JONATHAN S. 
Acting Recorder

RUSKIN

+? @L

thority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of

aval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section

pliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the
n under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by

retary of the Navy.

EPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
D

NAVY 

PERSONNEL COMMAN
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

f

1610
PERS-OOH/347
26 Aug 02

MEMORANDUM FOR

DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
RECORDS

Via:

Assistant fo

BCNR Matters, PERS-OOZCB

D R
USN

IN CASE OF

(b) OPNAVINS

0 OF 21 Aug 02

5354.1E  (Navy Equal Opportunity Manual)

Encl:

(1)

 BCNR  

Fil

06294-02 with service record

Referen

1.
Lieutenant
record a fi

Upon review of

2.
or evidence
national or

I am providing

3.
case.

sted an advisory opinion in response to
request to remove from his permanent
for the period  
02APF.22.

02FEBOl  to 

nclosure 

(l), I did not find any allegation

discrimination based on race,

or religion as described in reference

ethnlcity,
(bj .

o recommendation for the disposition of this

Director, Navy-Equal
Opportunity Office
(PERS-OOH)

P EPARTMENT OF THE NAV

PERSONNEL COMMAN
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

NAVY 

Y

D

1610
PERS-3 11
13 November 2002

MEMORANDUM FOR T

EXECUT IVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj: L

Ref:

(a) BUPERSINST 16 0.10 EVAL Manual
(b) Commander, Nav 1 Air Systems Command ltr 5420 Ser AIR-OO/ o f21 June 2002
(c) Commander, Nav
of 18 June 2002

Air  W arfare Center Aircraft Division ltr 5830 Ser 
 

000000A/118

1

Encl: (1) BCNR File

1. Enclosure (1) is returne
period 1 February 2002 t

.
I

The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the

2. Based on our review

vided, we find the following:

a. A review of the me

It is signed by the member
statement. The memb
received the member
paragraph S-8, the memb
statement.

’sstate

‘s headquarters record revealed the report in question to be on file.
knowledging the contents of the report and his right to submit a

desire to submit a statement. PERS-311 has not

nt and reporting senior
has two years from the ending date of the report to submit a

’s endorsement. Per reference (a), Annex S,

b. The report in question

a Detachment of Individual/Regular report.

e officer ’s performance and making recommendations concerning
e the responsibilities of the reporting senior. These duties are

In reviewing petitions that question the exercise of the
sponsibilities, we must determine if the reporting senior abused

 

authori We must see if there is any rational basis to support the reporting
the reporting senior ’s actions were the results of improper motive.

c. Evaluating a subordi

fi

promotion and assignment
accomplished in the
reporting senior evaluation
his/her discretionary
senior ’s decision, and whet
However, we must st
properly. Therefore, for
reporting senior did not pro
there is no rational support
an illegal or improper pu

that the reporting senior exercised his/her discretion

to recommend relief, the petitioner has to demonstrate that the
ly exercise his/her authority. The petitioner must show that either
the reporting senior
se. The petitioner must do more than just assert the improper

’s actions or that the reporting senior acted for
.

exercise of discretion; he m

st provide reasonable evidence to support the claim. I believe that

do e so.

d. Every member has
to do so if requested by
represents the judgment oft

3. While we are always
references (a) and (b),
question.

:

right to submit fitness or evaluations report input, and has the duty
In whatever manner the report is developed, it

to recommend removal of a fitness report and in view of
lieve that justice may be served by removing the fitness report in

Evaluation Branch

2