Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08488-07
Original file (08488-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                                      2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370 51O0



 BJG
 Docket No: 8488-07
 29 February 2008
From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj:   __
 REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref:     (a) T itl e 1 0 U.S.C. 1552
        
         End      (2)      DD Form 149 dtd 26 Sep 07 w/encl
                  (2)      HQMC MIQ memo dtd 4 Jan 08
                  3)       Subjs ltr dtd 12 Feb 08 w/encls
                  (4)      Subj’s naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board retesting , in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“A dm in i strative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 18 July 2007 and his rebuttal dated 13 August 2007. Copies of the page 11 and rebuttal are in enclosure (l)at Tab A.
2.       The Board, Consisting of Mses. Guill and H e berd and Mr. Pfejffer, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 February 2008, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited 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 which were available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.       Petitioner contends he was not counseled on the date of the entry, that the commanding officer who signed the entry was
 not the officer who counseled him, that the entry was placed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) without his rebuttal, and that the entry erroneously indicates he was assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP). Petitioner’s rebuttal is not in his OMPF, but the entry in question is there.
c.       In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (Mb) has commented to the effect that the contested entry should be modified by pen change deletion of “The Headquarters and Service Battalion Operations Section (S3) properly promulgated the paperwork that formally assigned you to the BCP.” MIO found no further error in connection with the entry.
d.       Enclosure (3) is Petitioner’s reply to the advisory opinion, reiterating his contentions of administrative error.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board finds an error warranting partial relief, specifically, modification of the contested entry by removing “The Headquarters and Service Battalion Operations Section (S3) properly promulgated the paperwork that formally assigned you to the BCP.” The Board finds the entry should be changed in a manner that the language to be deleted cannot be read.
In finding no further relief is warranted, the Board substantially concurs with enclosure (2) . The Board is unable to find Petitioner was not counseled on the date of the entry or that the commanding officer who signed the entry was not the officer who counseled him. The Board finds Petitioner may ask HQMC (MMSB—20) to file his rebuttal in his OMPF with the contested entry.
In view of the above, the Board directs the following limited corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by deleting, from the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 18 July 2007, “The Headquarters and Service Battalion Operations Section (S3) properly promulgated the paperwork that formally assigned you to the BCP.” This is to be
 accomplished by reconstructing the page 11 on which the entry appears or completely obliterating the language to be removed so it cannot be read, rather than merely lining through it.
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. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 72 3.6(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        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 72 3.6(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 PFEIFFER
                                                                                           Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09828-05

    Original file (09828-05.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 his naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) counseling entry dated 26 October 2005 (copy in enclosure (2)) and the fitness report for 25 August to 26 October 2003 (copy at Tab A).2. In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Manpower Information Operations, Manpower...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12164-08

    Original file (12164-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to.as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure {1}, with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 1 November 2004 to 31 May 2005 (copy at Tab A) and modifying his Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS) data by deleting the weight control entries for 8 February 1997 to 22 March 2000 and 1 March to 25 July 2005 (copy at Tab B).. The Board substantially concurs...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07726-06

    Original file (07726-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    This method of counseling is not considered official and documenting it with a page 11 entry for inclusion in the Marine’s service records is not authorized per the IRAM and MARCORSEPMAN.claim that his OMPF is in error because the rebuttal statement should not be on file without the corresponding page 11 counseling entry is supported by the IRAN. Commanders are authorized to prepare counseling entries on page 11 which will be useful to future commanders. Without a page 11 counseling entry,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04133-01

    Original file (04133-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Copies of RFC documents appearing in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) are at Tab B. removal of the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)“) counseling entry dated 17 April 1996, a copy of which is at Tab C, as he says it resulted from the fitness report. He provides his rebuttal of 17 April 1996 to the page 11 entry, and he states that he does not know why it is not in his record. The Board for Correction of Naval Records disapprove request for removal of the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03680-06

    Original file (03680-06.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 his naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 21 August 2002 to 17 January 2003 (copy in enclosure (1) at Tab A) and the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) counseling entry dated 16 February 2003 (copy in enclosure (1) at Tab B).2. In enclosure (4), the HQMC Manpower Information Operations,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5272 14

    Original file (NR5272 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hicks, Spooner and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 November 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. e. In enclosure (6), MIQ again commented to the effect that the contested entry dated 6 January 2012 should stand, but further commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request to remove the entries dated 14 December...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09788-09

    Original file (09788-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In enclosure (3), MMOA-4, the HOMC Officer Counseling and Evaluation Section, commented to the effect that Petitioner's failures of selection to lieutenant colonel should not be removed, notwithstanding the PERB action, in view of the noncompetitive cumulative relative values in his fitness reports as a major, as well as a fitness report date gap. Notwithstanding enclosure (3), the Board finds Petitioner’s failures of selection to lieutenant colonel should be removed as well. b, That his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09450-08

    Original file (09450-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Petitioner also requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 23 August 2005, a copy of which is at Tab A. The Board, consisting of Ms. Prevatt and and Messrs. Bourgeois and Mann, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 8 October 2008, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That any material or entries inconsistent with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03973-01

    Original file (03973-01.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 service record page 1 lg (“Administrative Remarks (1070)“) counseling entry dated 12 July 1999. (5), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page llg (“Adarministrative...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04770-09

    Original file (04770-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Ms. Wilcher and Messrs. Bowen and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 9 July 2009, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below shouid be taken on the available evidence of record. Region 2, MCESC [sic] [Marine Corps Embassy Security Group], Counseled this date for the following deficiencies: Violations of Article 133 and Article 134 UCMI [Uniform Code of Military Justice] relating to an...