DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51900
HD:hd
Docket No. 02657-09
22 January 2010
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj 7 7 ee ae ere meer oe sian, ; Sere
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: {a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
‘Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 12 Mar 09 w/attachments
(2) PERS-832B memo dtd 27 Apr 09
(3) PERS-32 memo dtd 11 May 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, from block 41 ("Comments on .
Performance") of the fitness report for 16 September 2006 to 15
September 2007 (copy at Tab A), "-Although a model member of the
Chief's Mess, he admitted to improperly consuming alcohol
onboard TAYLOR following the final inspection for the NEY
Award." and removing, from block 41 of the "not observed" report
for 16 September to 25 November 2007 (copy at Tab B),
"- [Petitioner] was awarded Commanding Officer's NUP [nonjudicial
punishment] on 13 NOV 2007 for violation of Article 92 and U.S.
Navy Regulations Article 1162 and subsequently issued a Punitive
Letter of Reprimand.” Finally, Petitioner requested removing
any other reference to the incident cited in the contested
reports. His Official Military Personnel File reflects no other
reference to this incident.
2. The Board, consisting of Ms. Ballinger and Messrs. W. Hicks
and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 22 January 2010, 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, 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 enclosures (2) and (3), the Navy Personnel Command
{NPC) offices with cognizance over the subject matter of
Petitioner's case have commented to the effect that the request
has merit and warrants partial relief, specifically, complete
removal of the report for 16 September to 25 November 2007.
Enclosure (3) notes that "not observed" fitness reports may not
include adverse comments.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of the contents of enclosures (2) and (3),
the Board finds an error warranting partial relief,
specifically, the requested modification of the report for 16
September to 25 November 2007. The Board agrees with enclosure
(3) in finding this "not observed" report should not have
included adverse comments, but finds the more appropriate
remedial action is removing those comments, as Petitioner
requested, rather than completely removing the report, which
could engender speculation about its content. In view of the
above, the Board directs the following limited corrective
action:
RECOMMENDATION :
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by modifying
the fitness report for 16 September to 25 Nove
10 June 2008 and signed
removing the following from block 41:
- [Petitioner] was awarded Commanding Officer's NUP on
13 NOV 2007 for violation of Article 92 and U.S. Navy
Regulations Article 1162 and subsequently issued a
Punitive Letter of Reprimand.
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.
ad. 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.
Svat Kian! b, [ote
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04493-09
04493-09 9 October 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Sub): i co , REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. PERS-00J ltr dtd 10 Aug 09 w/enclosure PERS-834 ltr dtd 21 Aug 09 PERS-32 memo dtd 2 Sep 09 ty a ea mw “4: 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02370-09
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 February to 17 August 2006 (copy at Tab A) and modifying the report for 1 February 2007 to 31 January 2008 (copy at Tab B) by changing the body composition entry in block 20 ("Physical Readiness") from "NS" (not within standards) to "MW" (medically waived),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08777-08
In enclosures (2) and (3), OPNAV N135 and the NPC office with cognizance over fitness reports, respectively, commented to the effect Petitioner's requests should be denied. e. In enclosure (6), the NPC office with cognizance over fitness reports noted that Petitioner's reporting senior had declined to submit a supplemental report, notwithstanding the PRIMS correction. In enclosure (9), that office noted the fitness report corrections recommended in enclosure (6} and stated hig SSB request...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12104-08
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 16 September 2007 to 12 May 2008, a copy of which is at Tab A. By enclosure (3), Petitioner requested reconsideration, specifically requesting modification of the report by removing, from block 41 (“Comments on Performance”), reference to the revocation of his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08771-08
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 2007 to 16 May 2008 and all related material, a copy of which is at Tab A. d. In enclosure (3), the NPC office with cognizance over performance evaluations also recommended removing the reference to a pending DFC, but added a recommendation to remove...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01196-09
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 "special" enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 to 24 March 2008, a copy of which is at Tab A, leaving in her record the "special" report for 25 March to 23 May 2008, a copy of which is at Tab B. The applicable performance evaluation directive, Bureau of Naval Personnel...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05164-11
c. While Petitioner was assigned to the U. S. Defense Attaché Office, Lisbon, Portugal, the same Air Force reporting senior, a colonel, gave him two fitness reports, the uncontested commendatory report for 8 April 2006 to 31 July 2007 (copy at Tab B) and the contested adverse report, submitted on the occasion of Petitioner’s detachment. The fifth endorsement, from the Commandant, Naval District Washington (exhibit 10 to Petitioner's application at enclosure (1)), recommended approving...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00148-09
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02822-09
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 fitness report for 18 December 2007 to 31 October 2008 (copy at Tab A) by deleting all marks, averages, recommendations and comments from blocks 33-43 and 45 and all statements and attachments. d. The contested fitness report shows Petitioner was the executive officer (XO) aboard...
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...