Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02819-10
Original file (02819-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

   

JSR
Docket No. 2819-10
1 July 2010

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records

To: Secretary of the Navy

Subj:

 

REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 12 Mar 10 w/attachments
(2) HOMC MMER/PERB memo dtd 7 May 09 and
copy of removed fitrept for 1 Jan - 23 May 07
(3) MCRC memo dtd 22 Jun 10
{4) Subject's 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 documentation of his relief for
cause (RFC) from recruiting duty. A copy of the only pertinent
document still in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) is
at Tab A. He also impliedly requested restoring his additional
- military occupational specialty (AMOS) of 8411 (recruiter),
which was voided as a result. of the RFC, and his special duty
assignment (SDA) pay, which was terminated on 29 June 2007 as a
result of the RFC. Finally, he impliedly requested that the
Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS) data pertaining to him
be corrected by removing the draw case code “AM” (relieved from
recruiter duty).

2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Grover, Ivins and McBride,
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 1
July 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, 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. At enclosure (2) are copies of the report of the
Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board
(PERB) directing removal of the adverse fitness report for 1
January to 23 May 2007 and the report itself. PERB directed
removing this report because it documented the nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) of 23 May 2007: that has been set aside by the
officer who awarded it.

c. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the Marine
Corps Recruiting Command office having cognizance over the
subject matter of Petitioner’s case has commented to the effect
that the request has merit and warrants favorable action,
-because the NJP on which the RFC was based has been set aside.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of the contents of enclosure (3), the Board
finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the
following corrective action:

RECOMMENDATION :

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing
the Approve Active RELM (reenlistment/extension/lateral move)
document created on 12 December 2007, reflecting the approval of
Petitioner’s RFC (OMPF, Commendatory Derogatory - Other folder,
image 3).

b. That his record be corrected further to show his AMOS of
8411 was not voided.

c. That his record be corrected further to show that his
SDA pay was not terminated on 29 June 2007, but continued to his
transfer from Recruiting Station Houston, Texas on 21 November
2007.

d. That his record be corrected further by modifying the
MCTFS data to remove the draw case code “AM.”

e. 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.

f. 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, Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(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.

Done Ran/ dd. (AP gra
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.

eo W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02280 12

    Original file (02280 12.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 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 30 March 2009, a copy of which is at Tab A. That his record be corrected further to restore his AMOS of 8411. c. That his record be corrected further to show his entitlement to SDA pay for 21 July 2010 to 13 June...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5624 14

    Original file (NR5624 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to its regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. His transfer fitness report from RS Harrisburg, for 1 January to 13 July 2013 (copy at enclosure (1)), was fully favorable, even though the reporting senior, the Commanding Officer (CO), RS Harrisburg, requested Petitioner’s RFC on 12 April 2013, and the reviewing officer, the CO, First Marine Corps District, favorably endorsed the request on 26...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07838-10

    Original file (07838-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    JAMS stated that the NUP “stemmed from [Petitioner’s] failure to report a civilian DUI arrest,” however, the UPB entry actually says he was punished “for failing to notify his command of his DUI conviction [emphasis added] .” JAM5 noted that “the requirement to report the conviction (rather than the arrest) is lawful.” d. Enclosure (4) explains that PERB directed removing the contested fitness report in light of enclosure (3). e. In enclosure (5), the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06191-01

    Original file (06191-01.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 fitness report for 15 March to 14 August 2000, a copy of which is at enclosure (1). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2716 13

    Original file (NR2716 13.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 fitness report for 1 January to 20 February 2007 (copy at Tab A) and all documentation of his relief for cause (RFC) from duty as a canvassing recruiter (copy at Tab B). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bey, Chapman and Green, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06608-11

    Original file (06608-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05473-00

    Original file (05473-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    (6), the M arine Corps Recruiting Command ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be MOS , and 2 In correspondence attached as enclosure (7), the HQMC Enlisted Assignment Branch (MI&A) has also commented to the effect that Petitioner ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be approved, but his requests concerning his RFC should be denied. Point of contact is M ecommended that the Board equest for removal of the VMC 118(11), page 11 .entry dated Acting Head, Field Support...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03925-04

    Original file (03925-04.rtf) 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, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the fitness reports for 1 January to 1 April 2002, 2 April to 22 June 2002, 23 June to31 December 2002, 1 January to 30 June 2003, and 1 July to26 August 2003. We do not, however, recommend that his voided MOS 8411 be reinstated and the recoupment of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0776 14

    Original file (NR0776 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion in finding your RFC should not be set aside,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7775 13

    Original file (NR7775 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He was then selected by the FY 2012 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board, convened on 17 April 2012, and he was promoted to gunnery sergeant with a date of rank and effective date of 1 December 2012. d. Enclosure (4) shows that the in zone percentage selected for the FY 2006 Staff Sergeant Selection Board was 62.2. e. Enclosure (5) reflects that the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board directed removing Petitioner's fitness report for 1 April to 2 November 2006, which documented the later...