Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03884-06
Original file (03884-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

HD: hd
Docket No. 03884-06
14 September 2006

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy

Subj
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD

Re f :     (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:     (1) DD Form 149 dtd 2 May 06 w/attachments
(2)      PERS-311 memo dtd 28 Aug 06
(3)      Subjects 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 the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2004 to 29 June 2005, a copy of which is at Tab A, leaving in the record the report for 16 November 2004 to 1 July 2005, a copy of which is at Tab B.

2.       The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hess, Lippolis and Swarens, reviewed Petitioners allegations of error and injustice on 14 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.       In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office having cognizance over the subject matter addressed in Petitioner’s application has 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 enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an error warranting the following corrective action.

RECONNENDATION:

a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following enlisted performance evaluation report and related material, leaving in the record the report for 16 November 2004 to 1 July 2005:
         Period of Report
Date of Report   Reporting Senior         From     To
         05May09  04Nov16         05Jun29

b.       That NO memorandum be filed in place of the removed report.

c.       That appropriate corrections be made to the magnetic tape or microfilm maintained by NPC.

d.       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.

e.       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.

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. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e)
of the revised Procedures 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.


         W.        DEAN PF EIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2006 | 02398-06

    Original file (02398-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hess, Lippolis and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 14 September 2006, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office having cognizance over the subject matter addressed in Petitioner’s application has commented to the effect that his request has...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04311-05

    Original file (04311-05.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 naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 16 September to 12 November 2004 (copy at Tab A). By memorandum of 18 April 2005 (copy in enclosure (1)), the general court-martial authority (GCMA) concluded “the issue is moot” in light of Petitioner’s command’s message to the Navy Personnel Command (NPC),...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2686 14

    Original file (NR2686 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hedrick, Marquez and Sproul, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 October 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. In enclosure (4), PERS-32, the NPC office with cognizance over fitness reports, has commented to the effect that both contested fitness reports should be removed. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00633-06

    Original file (00633-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Petitioner contends the contested report, submitted on her detachment, violated the prohibitions in Chief of Naval Operations Instruction 6000.1B against adverse performance evaluations by reason of pregnancy or performance evaluation comments on pregnancy.d. e. Per enclosure (2), the uncorrected report in question was accepted as originally submitted to the member’s record, attached with an NAVPERS 1616/23 (Memo) over 9 months after the report had been issued to the member. The comments...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00375-09

    Original file (00375-09.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 the enlisted performance evaluation reports for 16 October to 13 November 2006 and 14 November 2006 to 15 March 2007. The Board, consisting of Ms. Guill and Messrs. Grover and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 5 March 2009, and pursuant to its...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 08467-08

    Original file (08467-08.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 modifying the marks and comments of the enlisted performance evaluation report for 10 July 2005 to 15 March 2006 (copy at Tab A), in accordance with a letter dated 14 August 2008 from the reporting senior (at enclosure (1)) because the report erroneously reflected that he had failed the Spring...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10577 14

    Original file (NR10577 14.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 the enlisted performance evaluation report for 17 March to 23 May 2005 (copy at Tab A). CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an error warranting the following corrective...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00148-09

    Original file (00148-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    e. Enclosure (3) is Petitioner's reply to enclosure (2), maintaining that the contested report should be removed, as it would not have been submitted, had the STENNIS report not been temporarily lost. f. In enclosure (4), PERS-811, the NPC enlisted advancements office, noted that including the STENNIS report in Petitioner's PMA computation would not have changed the result, as that report was 3.8, which was Petitioner's PMA (his PMA was computed using the average of the contested 3.6 report...