DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24390
JSR
Docket No. NR3743-13
13 March 2014
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: secretary of the Navy
Subj: SSCT QC, osc, aie
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 25 Sep 12 w/attachments
(2) HOMC MMER/PERB memo dtd 3 Apr 13
(3) HOMC MMER e-mail dtd 4 Jun 13
(4) HOMC JAM2 memo dtd 31 Jul 13
(5) HOMC MIQ memo dtd 19 Aug 13
(6) HOMC JAM2 memo dtd 23 Oct 13
(7) HOMC MIQ memo dtd 20 Nov 13
(8) 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 the fitness report for 1 January
to 15 August 20113 (copy at Tab A). Enclosure (2) reflects that
the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB) has directed removing this report.
Petitioner further requested removing the service record page
11(A) (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 18 December
2010 (copy at Tab B) and the page 11(b) entry dated 10 August
2011 with his rebuttal dated 15 August 2011 (copies at Tab C).
Finally, by implication, he also requested removing the page 11
entry dated 3 August 2011.
2. The Board, consisting of Ms. Lapinski and Messrs. Gorenflo
and Hicks, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 13 March 2014, 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 (3) shows the basis for the PERB action.
¢. In correspondence attached as enclosures (4) and (5),
the HOMC offices having cognizance over the subject matter of
Petitioner's request to remove page 11 entries has commented to
the effect that the page 11(A) entry dated 18 December 2010
should stand, but that the page 11(b) entry dated 10 August 2011
should be removed. In enclosures (6) and (7), those offices
commented to the effect that the entry dated 3 August 2011
should stand.
CONCLUSION :
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of the contents of enclosures (4) through
(7), the Board finds the existence of an error warranting the
following limited corrective action:
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing
the service record page 11(b) (“Administrative Remarks (1070)")
entry dated 10 August 2011 and his rebuttal dated 15 August
2011. This is to be accomplished by physically removing the
page 11(b) on which the entry appears and the rebuttal, or
completely obliterating the entry and rebuttal so they cannot he
read, rather than merely lining through them.
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.
ec. 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.
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.
Pon TEA Z. halo
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.
TaD, Due nen
ROBERT D. ALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8518-13
2, The Board, consisting of Messrs. Boyd, Chapman and Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 Maxch 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. 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...
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 | 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 | CY2012 | 12640 12
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Clemmons, Gorenflo and Midboe, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 24 January 2013, 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 the service record page 11(b) (“Administrative Remarks (1070) ") entry dated 5 August >010 and his undated rebuttal. d. That any material directed to be...
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 | CY2014 | NR11866 14
c. The page 11 entry at issue counsels Petitioner for “Violation of the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] Article 92 by involving yourself in an inappropriate relationship with the spouse of another service member.” d. Enclosure (3) shows that the PERB basis for removing the contested fitness report included a finding that the page 11 entry in question, which was cited in the fitness report, “was not substantiated.” e. In the advisory opinion at enclosure (4), the HOMC office with...
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 | CY2012 | 02280 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 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 | CY2012 | 03944-12
The Board, consisting of Ms. White-Olson and Messrs. Gattis and Silberman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 30 August 2012, 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 11 February 9011. c. That any material or entries inconsistent...