Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00809-06
Original file (00809-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                   2NAVYANNEX
                  WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




HD:hd
 Docket No. 00809-06
 21      September        2006



From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
                  Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL

Ref:     (a ) 10 U.S.C. 1552
En cl :    (1) DD Form 149 dtd 13 Jan 06 w/attachments
 (2)      PERS-311 memo dtd 21 Apr 06
(3)      Subject’s naval record
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 the set aside nonjudicial punishment (NJP) awarded him on 29 October 2002, including the comment, in the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2001 to 15 November 2002 (copy at Tab A), to the effect he received NJP for misuse of a government credit card. It Is noted that Petitioner’s record reflects no reference, other than that in the performance evaluation report, to the NJP.
2.       The Board, consisting of Messrs. Chapman, Schultz and Spooner, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 21 September 2006, 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.       Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.

c.       Block 43 (“Comments on Performance”) of Petitioner’s enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2001 to 15 November 2002 includes, at the end, the following contested bullet:
Awarded NJP 29 Oct 02 for Violation of Article 92 {Uniform Code of Military Justice]. 5 Specifications regarding government credit card use.
d.       By letter of 28 October 2005, a copy of which is in enclosure

(1), Petitioner’s then current commanding officer, at a different command from that which had imposed the NJP, set it aside. The reason given was not a determination that Petitioner had not committed the misconduct for which he was punished, but that he had performed well since the NJP, and that the NJP should not be allowed to continue to harm his career.
e.       In correspondence attached as enclosure (2) , PERS-3ll, the Navy Personnel Command office having cognizance over performance evaluations, has commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request should be denied. They noted that the set aside action took place about three years after the report in question was submitted; that a performance evaluation is “unique to the period being evaluated”; that Petitioner chose not to make a statement to the report; that the reporting senior is charged with determining what material will be included in a performance evaluation report; that the comments and marks are at the reporting senior’s discretion; and that evaluating a member’s performance and making recommendations about suitability for appointment and assignments are the reporting senior’s responsibility. They stated that the pertinent report was accurately prepared and submitted in accordance with applicable guidance as to when a reporting senior must document details of misconduct in a performance evaluation report. Finally, they concluded that Petitioner does not prove the report of concern to be unjust or in error.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and notwithstanding the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting partial relief, specifically, removal of “Awarded NJP 29 Oct 02 for.” Since the set aside action was not based on a finding that Petitioner did not commit misconduct, the Board finds the reference to the misconduct for which he was punished should stand. However, because the NJP was lawfully set aside by the duly authorized action of Petitioner’s then current commanding officer, the Board finds the express reference to the NJP should be removed so that his record will not reveal .he received NJP.

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

a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by modifying as follows block 43 of the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2001 to 15 November 2002, dated 18 November2002 and signed by Commander, USN:
Remove from the last bullet “Awarded NJP 29 Oct 02 for, “ so that the bullet as amended will read as follows: “- Violation of Art 92. 5 Specifications regarding government credit card use.”
b.       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.
c.       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.
d.       That the remainder of Petitioner’s request be denied.
4. 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                 JONATHAN S. RUSKIN
 Recorder         Acting Recorder
5.       The foregoing report of the Board is submitted for your review and action.

                                                                        W. DEAN PFEIFFER
          Executive Director

Reviewed and approved:
Robert T. C ali
Assistant G eneral Couns el
( M anpower and Reserve Affair )

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02071-02

    Original file (02071-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    They further find the EM2 report for 10 October 2000 to 15 March 2001 should be removed as well, as Petitioner would not have been evaluated in this rate, but for the reduction. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following enlisted performance evaluation reports and related material: Period of Report Date of Report Reporting Senior From To 00Dec22 00Jan12 000ctO9 01Mar15 000ctlO 01Mar15 We recommend the report for the period 12 January 2000 to 9 October...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06307-05

    Original file (06307-05.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    CONFINEMENT ORDERED FROM (YYMMMDD( 40 CHANGE E1~OS TO (YYMMMDCi~ 8. REPORT OF ACTION [1 1). In view of the member’s reduction in rate being set aside we recommend the following be deleted from block- 43 of the report in question: “Evaluation submitted due to member’s reduction in rate”.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02498-05

    Original file (02498-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 haval record be corrected by modifying the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 March 2001 to 15 March 2002 (copy at Tab A) to omit the bullets concerning nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and withdrawal of recommendation for advancement. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), PERS-311, the NPC office having...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03856-06

    Original file (03856-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has administratively removed from Petitioner’ s naval record all reference to the NJP, except the contested statement in his fitness report. d. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), PERS-3 11, the NPC office having cognizance over fitness reports, has commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request should be denied, as the NJP was properly documented in his fitness report when it was imposed, and the set aside action took place about two years and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02509-02

    Original file (02509-02.PDF) Auto-classification: Approved

    The reporting senior ’s endorsement of 13 May 2001 merely recommended that Petitioner ’s rebuttal be accepted for file in his official service record.Neither document refers to the original marks to be raised per the letter-supplement. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected further by removing the letter-supplement dated 21 January 2001, pertaining to the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 1999 to 15 November 2000; but that Petitioner ’s statement of 10 May 2001...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04515-00

    Original file (04515-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2001 | 00112-00

    Original file (00112-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR933-13

    Original file (NR933-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Ms. Lapinski and Messrs. Dikeman and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 7 March 2013, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. f. In enclosure (6), PERS-32, the NPC office with cognizance over performance evaluations, commented to the effect that in light of enclosures (4) and (5), Petitioner’s performance evaluation record should be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06967-00

    Original file (06967-00.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2001 | 00108-00

    Original file (00108-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...