DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 10692-10
16 February 2011
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Te: Secretary of the Navy
ama a a ag
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Emel: DD Form 149 dtd 5 Sep 10 w/attachment
HOMC JAMS memo dtd 17 Nov 10 w/enclosure
1)
2)
3) HOMC MIO memo dtd 28 Dec 10
4) Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference ta), Subject
hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written
application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in
effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the
service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)"”) entry
dated 14 January 2009 (sic), a copy of which is at Tab A.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bourgeois, J. Hicks and
Ivins, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 10 February 2011, 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.
Bs 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 the Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies which were available under existing law
and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. In correspondence at enclosures (2) and (3), the
Headquarters Marine Corps offices with cognizance over the
subject matter of this case have commented to the effect that
the request has merit and warrants at least partial relief,
specifically, modification of the contested entry by removing
“wand failure to report this incident to your chain of command”
and “report all incidents to your chain of command,”. The
opinion at enclosure (2) recommends that the contested entry be
removed completely, if the Board finds Petitioner was not
advised of his rights under Article 31(b), Uniform Code of
Military Justice.
CONCLUSION :
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
and especially in light of enclosures {2} and (3), the Board
finds an error warranting the partial relief described in
paragraph 3.b above. In this regard, the Board is unable to
find Petitioner was not advised of his rights. 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 service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks
(1070)") entry dated 14 January 2009 (sic) by removing “and
failure to report this incident to your chain of command” and
report all incidents to your chain of command,”. This is to be
accomplished by completely obliterating the above quoted
language 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 ina
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 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.
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.
‘Ns
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04770-09
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12164-08
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 | CY2014 | NR5272 14
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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR0593 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 to 29% April 2011 (copy at Tab A), removing the service record page 1i (*Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated 1 December 2010 and 10 May 2011 (copies at Tab 3) and changing his reenlistment code from RE-3C (Commandant of the Marine Corps...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00378-11
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. e. In enclosure (5), the HOMC office with cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner’s implied request to remove her failure of selection for promotion commented to the effect that this request should be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02803-07
He further requested removal of the fitness report for 20 November 1998 to 31 March 1999 (copy at Tab C in enclosure (1)). d. In enclosure (3), Petitioner added his request to remove the page 11 entry dated 24 March 1999. e. In enclosure (4), the HQMC PERB commented to the effect that the contested fitness report should stand. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11d (“Administrative Remarks (1070) 7”) entry dated 24 March 1999.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3524 13
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hicks, Spooner and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 21 August 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. g. In enclosure (8), MIQ commented to the effect that in light of enclosure (7), the contested BCP assignment and page 11 entries should be removed. of enclosures (5) and (8), the Board finds the existence of an error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4745 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7O! c. Enclosure (2), the report of the HOMC PERB in Petitioner's case, shows that the PERB directed removing the contested fitness report for 1 January to 27 April 2008, but commented to the effect that the five remaining reports at issue should stand. In enclosure (5), Petitioner provided new evidence in support of his new request to remove the page 11 entries dated 11 June 2010 and 12 May 2011. g. In enclosures (6) and (7),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05953 12
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 2006, a copy of which is at Tab A. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Gorenflo, Grover and Midboe, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 3 October 2012, and pursuant to its...