DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 9085-13/
5173-14
20 May 2014
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: secretary of the Navy
Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) Case summary
(2) Subject's naval record/cpD
(3) HOMC memo MIQ dtd 21FEB14
(4) HOMC memo MMRP-13/PERB dtd 9APRi4 (Docket # 729-13)
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an
enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board
requesting removal of derogatory material from his naval record,
specifically, two administrative remarks (page 11) entries dated
28 August and 1 September 2011, regarding his civil involvement
charge of driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol. This
request also includes the removal of a fitness report (FITREP)
for the period from 25 June to 31 December 2011, which references
the DUI. Enclosures (1) and (2) apply
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Dixit, Mr. Sproul, and Ms.
White-Olsen, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 14 May 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the partial 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinions (AO), enclosures (3) and (4), furnished by Headquarters
Marine Corps (HQMC).
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. Petitioner’s application to the Board was filed ina
timely manner.
c. On 23 July 2011 Petitioner was arrested by civil
authorities and charged with DUI. As a result of this action he
received an adverse FITREP for the period from 25 June to 31
December 2011.
d. On 29 August 2011 Petitioner was counselled regarding the
23 July 2011 incident and a page 11 entry was filed in his
record. This entry stated, in part, that his driving privileges
were immediately suspended and his base driving privileges
revoked until completion of his involvement in traffic court on
or about 9 September 2011.
e. On 1 September 2011 Petitioner was again counselled
regarding the 23 July 2011 incident, and another page 11 entry
was filed in his record. However, this page 11 entry provided
more detailed information regarding the civil incident and the
suspension of his base privileges.
f. An AO from Manpower Information Quality Assurance,
Manpower Information Systems Division (MIQ), enclosure (3),
recommends Petitioner’s request for removal of one of the page 11
entries be granted, specifically, the page 11 dated 29 August
2011 since it does not contain all of the required information
regarding the 23 July 2011 incident. With that being said, the
AO recommends that the more detailed page 11 entry dated 1
September 2011 remain in the record.
g. An AO from the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB),
enclosure (4), recommends Petitioner’s request for removal of the
adverse FITREP for the period from 25 June to 31 December 2011,
be denied. However, the PERB did modify the report to reflect
the correct verbiage.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
in concurrence with the AOs from HOMC, the Board concludes that
Petitioner's requests warrant partial favorable action. The
Board concludes that there is an existence of error in the record
being that there is a duplicate page 11 entry for the same
offense. In this regard, the Board further concludes that the
record should be changed by removing the page 11 entry dated 29
August 2011.
In view of the above, the Board directs the following partial
corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing
the page 11 entry dated 29 August 2011.
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.
d. That no further relief be granted.
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 BRIAN J. GEORGE
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 Regulation, 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.
ROBERT D. 2
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8365 13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing any and all derogatory material regarding. e. An AO received from the HQOMC Military Justice Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM), enclosure (5), regarding Petitioner’s request to remove the NJP, page 11, and all related references thereto, recommended relief be granted because he self-reported that he...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6447 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing any and all references regarding imposition of a nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for willful disobedience. In this regard, these AOs recommend Petitioner's request be denied because he did receive NJP on 11 May 2007, and was properly issued an adverse FITREP as a result of the NUP. REED Recorder S....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2083 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting removal of derogatory material, specifically, a nonjudicial punishment (NIP) dated 18 June 2010, an undated administrative remarks (page 11) entry, an adverse Fitness Report (FITREP), and documentation regarding Relief For Cause (RFC), from her naval record. Enclosure (3) applies, 2. pine Board, consisting cf iii reviewed Petitioner's allegations of...
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 | CY2013 | NR9019 13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her record be corrected by removing derogatory material (nonjudicial punishment (NJP), administrative remarks (Page 11) counselling, et¢.) As a result, she did not return to her duty station until late afternoon on 17 August 2012. f. Enclosure (4), an AO from the HOMC Military Justice Branch, Judge advocate Division, regarding Petitioner’s...
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 | CY2014 | NR1145 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board, requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing any and all derogatory material regarding the nonjudicial punishment (NUP) imposed on 31 July 2007 and the fitness report (FITREP) for the period from 16 December 2006 to 31 July 2007, which references the NUP, from both his official military personnel file (OMPF) and the Marine Corps Total Force System...
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 | CY2013 | NR9058 13
d. In the AO from HOMC JAM (enclosure (4)), it was recommended that the page 11 entry remain in the record, but it should be redacted by removing all references to an adulterous affair with a CWO, and the investigation which resulted from this information. In this regard, the Board concludes that the page 11, although incorrectly written, should remain in the record but be redacted by removing all references regarding an inappropriate relationship with a “married” CWO and the investigation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07838-10
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)...