DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ‘
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docker No. 10301-09
3 November 2009
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
po EN a a te nae
Subj: % .
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: fa) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Enel: DD Form 149 dtd 14 Sep 09 w/attachments
’PERS-811 memo dtd 23 Sep 09
Subject's ltr dtd 13 Oct 09
Bw hb
)
} PERS-32 memo dtd 22 Sep 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 enlisted performance
‘evaluation report for 16 June 2007 to 15 June 2008 (copy at Tab
A) and the service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks")
entries dated 25 February and 17 June 2008 (copies at Tab B);
and advancing her to SK2 (pay grade E-5).
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Ivins, Vogt and Zsalman,
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
29 October 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, 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 enclosure (2), PERS-32, the Navy Personnel Command
(NPC) office having cognizance over performance evaluations, has
commented to the effect Petitioner's request to remove the
contested performance evaluation report should be denied.
c. In enclosure (3), PERS-811, the NPC office with
cognizance over enlisted advancements, has commented to the
effect that Petitioner's requests for removal of page 13 entries
and advancement has merit and warrants favorable action, That
office specifically recommended correcting Petitioner's record
to show she was advanced to SK2 with an effective date of 16
June 2008 and time in rate date of 1 January 2008.
d. In enclosure (4), Petitioner explains why she strongly
desires not only advancement, but also removal of the contested
performance evaluation report.
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 the existence of an error and injustice
warranting the following limited corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION :
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show she
was advanced to SK2 with an effective date of 16 June 2008 and
time in rate date of 1 January 2008.
b. That her record be corrected further by removing the
service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks") entries dated
25 February and 17 June 2008.
c, That any material or entries 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 ina
confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross
reference being made a part of Petitioner's naval record.
e. That the remainder of Petitioner's request be denied.
4. Tt 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.
BVO DE A, (Er
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 Procédures 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.
Fe2_w. DEAN PFEIFFER
_Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08467-08
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 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 | 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 | 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 | 11416-08
11416-08 9 October 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj : ‘REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: © (a) 10 U.S.C. 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 revising the enlisted performance’ evaluation report for 21 August 2007 to 15 March 2008 (copy at “Tab A). That any material directed to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01970-02
He said he did not believe Petitioner was trying to get out of deploying, and he said he did not recommend withdrawing Petitioner's advancement recommendation. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3, PERS-811, the NPC office having cognizance over enlisted advancements, has commented to the effect that Petitioner's request to reinstate his advacement recommendation and grant him advancement should be denied, since PERS-3 1 1 recommended that the contested evaluation report remain in his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR642-13
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Dikeman, Gorenflo and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6 June 2013, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. The corrected report marks Petitioner “Early Promote” (best) in block 45 and marks him alone in block 46. d. Inenclosure (2), PERS-32, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office with cognizance over enlisted performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06664-11
The Board, consisting of Ms. Aldrich and Messrs. Pfeiffer and Spain, reviewed Pétitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 8 September 2011, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 26 October 2010. That any material or entries inconsistent with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08361-01
Pursuant to 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 both the “not observed” and observed enlisted performance evaluation reports for 1 December 1994 to 30 January 1995, the performance evaluation report for 31 January 1995 to 5 March 1996, and the service record page 9 (Enlisted Performance Record) whose last entry is the entry” for 1 December 1994 to 30 January...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06149-11
06149220 22 August 2011 i From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. The Board, consisting of Messrs. W. Hicks, Spooner and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 18 August 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07874-09
The other contested report, for 1 February 2002 to 31 January 2003, during which the convening authority acted, documents Petitioner’s conviction by GCM. Finally, it incorrectly indicated that Petitioner requested “redaction” of only one fitness report, his report of 31 January 2002, and recommended removing that report. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, notwithstanding enclosure (2) and especially in light of enclosures (3), (4) and (5), the Board...