DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 00656-09
3 April 2009
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 23 Jan 09 w/attachments
(2) PERS-311 memo dtd 20 Feb 09
(3) Subject's ltr dtd 20 Mar 09
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 fitness report of record for
1 November 2007 to 8 August 2008 signed by Petitioner on
11 August 2008 (copy at Tab A) and the reporting senior's
letter-supplement dated 24 November 2008 (copy at Tab B) and
filing in their place the more favorable fitness report for the
same period signed by Petitioner on 14 August 2008 (first
document attached to application in enclosure (1)).
2. The Board, consisting of Ms. Colbert and Messrs. Storz and
Tew, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
2 April 2009, 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. The only differences between the report of record and
the report Petitioner provides are that block 35 ("Military
Bearing/Character") of the report of record shows "4.0" (fourth
best of five possible marks), while the report Petitioner
provides shows "5.0" (best); block 45 of the report of record
shows a "Member Trait Average" and Summary Group Average" of
"4.67" while the report Petitioner provides shows "4.83" and
block 46 of the report of record shows Petitioner's signature
date as 11 August 2008, while the report he provides shows 14
August 2008.
d. The reporting senior's fitness report letter-supplement
says the change of block 35 from "4.0" to "5.0" was "due to
administrational error." Petitioner provides a letter dated
23 December 2008 from the reporting senior's staff (last
document attached to application at enclosure (1)), supporting
Petitioner's contention that the report of record should have
been destroyed, but was mistakenly forwarded for file in
Petitioner's record instead of the more favorable report he
requests entering in his record.
e. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Navy
Personnel Command office having cognizance over fitness reports
commented to the effect Petitioner's request should be denied,
as the. letter-supplement has been added to the record, and
Petitioner does not prove the contested report to be in error.
f. In enclosure (3), Petitioner's reply to enclosure (2),
he maintains the letter of 23 December 2008 from the reporting
senior's staff does establish that the report of record is
erroneous and should be replaced by the more favorable report.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
notwithstanding the contents of enclosure (2), and particularly
in light of the letter from the reporting senior's staff, the
Board finds an error and injustice warranting the following
corrective action:
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner! s naval record be corrected by modifying
r 1 November 2007 to 8 August
MSN, on 1 August 2008 and by
2008, signed a
Petitioner on 11 August 2008:
(1) Block 35: Change from "4.0" to "5.0."
(2) Block 45: Change "Member Trait Average" and Summary
Group Trait Average” from "4.67" to "4.83."
(3) Block 46: Change date of Petitioner's signature from
11 August 2008 to 14 August 2008.
b. That his record be corrected further by removing the
reporting senior's fitness report letter-supplement dated
24 November 2008.
c. 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.
d. 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.
ee
)
OWE AG XN “
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 PFELF
Reviewed and approved:
t .
Qa. Xx. CS.
W~4- 09
Robert T. Cail 3
Acsistant General
Viai:oower and Reserve Affairs)
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03437-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 HD :hd Docket No. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Geberth, Pfeiffer and Silberman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 26 January 2011, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following original...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06305-07
Petitioner’s application at enclosure (1) includes a letter dated 2 July 2007 from the reporting senior stating the following:The initial report for this period was mailed to BUPERS [Bureau of Naval Personnel] without my approved corrections to the draft report. He notes that his PSR entry for the period in question does not reflect, as it should, that supplemental material has been submitted, but that this error will not have to be corrected if his request is approved.MAJORITY...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08643-07
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 original fitness report for 1 May to 17 August 2006, together with a letter-supplement and a letter transmitting a supplemental report for the same period, so that the supplemental report will be the only report in the record for this period. The Board, consisting of Messrs. W....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02897-05
In a letter dated 5 January 2005 to Petitioner (copy in enclosure (1)), the reporting senior explained the document had been submitted “to assist the [CO’s] Trait Average, and enable applicable reports to be graded on the same basis.” He said “These corrections were submitted for three other Evaluation Reports within the same time period.” Finally, he said the changes “should not be viewed as an indication of any change in your performance.” This letter is not in Petitioner’s record. They...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03187-01
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 original fitness report for 1 February to 14 August 1998, a copy of which is at Tab A, and filing in its place the supplemental report for the same period dated 14 August 1998, a copy of which is with Petitioner’s application at enclosure (1). ’s ’s record and d. That any material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2458 14
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 original enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2011 to 15 August 2012, signed by Lieutenant Commander H. R. F---, Supply Corps, U. S. Navy Reserve, and the evaluation report letter-supplement Gated 25 Ahugust 2013 (copies at Tab B), and replacing them with the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04900-01
In correspondence attached as enclosure (4), Pers-OOJ found evidence of racial bias CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, notwithstanding the contents of enclosure existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action: (2), and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (4), the Board finds the RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitneis reports and related material, including...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4797 13
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 1 May 2011 to 30 April 2012 and the extension letter dated 28 June 2012, extending the period of this report to 28 June 2012 (copies at Tab A). Petitioner requests that the contested fitness report and extension letter be removed to comply with the Commander,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02276-08
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 1 November 2004 to 1 April 2005, a copy of which is at Tab A. d. Petitioner alleges that on 10 December 2004, the reporting senior assaulted his wife, and that the reporting senior then told Petitioner that if Petitioner reported the incident, he would ruin...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03461-05
03461-05 4 April 2006 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD R Ref: (a) 10 U.S~C. 3 (1) Block 20: Change from “MINS” to “PINS.” (2) Block 43 *36: Change to read “- [PFA] Results: APR 03 P/NS (1st failure) and OCT 03 P/NS (2nd failure) CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting partial relief, specifically, the requested correction...