Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5419 14
Original file (NR5419 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
70} S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

HD

Docket No. NR5419-14
27 March 2015

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy

;
REVI

Ref: (a) 10 U.8.C. 1552

 

Enel: (1) DD Forms 149 dtd 24 Mar and 19 May 14,
: each w/fattachments -
(2} PERS-832 memo dtd 16 Jan 15
(3) PERS-32 memo dtd 21 Jan 15

1. Pursuant to the provisions cf reference (a}, Subjecc,

hereinaiter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with thi
Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable navel record be
corrected by removing the NAVPERS 1070/12 (service wesosa wage 2

S
286 Ses 3
("Zdministrative Remazvits")} entry dated 22 Merch 2011 and his
rebuttal dated 1 April 20612 (copies at Tab h) and the enlisted
performance evaluation report for 11 November 2010 to 26 May 2011
(copy at Tab B).

2. The Board, consisting of Meee
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on

26 March 2015, 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 and applicable statutes, reguiations 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.

 

es
|
|
ee
b. Inenclosure (2), PERS-832, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC)
office with cognizance over enlisted performance, has commented to
the effect that the contested page 13 entry should stand.

c. In enclosure (3), PERS-32, the NPC office with cognizance
over performance evaluations, has commented to the effect that the
contested performance evaluation report should be removed.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of enclosures (2) and (3), the Board finds the
existence of an error warranting partial relief, specifically,
removal of the performance evaluation report at issue. The Board
is unable to find the officer who signed the page 13 entry in question
did not have “By direction” authority. In view of the above, the
Board directs the following limited corrective action:

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the
following enlisted performance evaluation report and related
material:

Period of Report
Date of Report Reporting Senior From To

2s vay 1: I cov to as may

b. That there be inserted in Petitioner’s naval record a
memorandum in place of the removed report containing appropriate
identifying data; that the memorandum state that the report has been
removed by order of the Secretary of the Navy in accordance with the
provisions of federal law and may not be made available to selection
boards and other reviewing authorities; and that such boards may not

conjecture or draw any inference as to the nature of the removed
report.

c. That appropriate corrections be made to the magnetic tape
or microfilm maintained by NPC.

d. 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.
ection 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.

4. Pursuant to &

Satan ¢, Lata

JONATHAN S. RUSKIN
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.

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Fxecutive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR933-13

    Original file (NR933-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Ms. Lapinski and Messrs. Dikeman and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 7 March 2013, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. f. In enclosure (6), PERS-32, the NPC office with cognizance over performance evaluations, commented to the effect that in light of enclosures (4) and (5), Petitioner’s performance evaluation record should be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03295-07

    Original file (03295-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In enclosure (2), PERS-311, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office with cognizance over performance evaluations, commented to the effect that the contested adverse performance evaluation report is valid, but that it does not appear in They recommended that he be asked to provide that he submit a grther action regarding Petitioner's OMPF., a signed copy for inclusion in his QMPF; this report be taken. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, notwithetanding...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02071-02

    Original file (02071-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    They further find the EM2 report for 10 October 2000 to 15 March 2001 should be removed as well, as Petitioner would not have been evaluated in this rate, but for the reduction. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following enlisted performance evaluation reports and related material: Period of Report Date of Report Reporting Senior From To 00Dec22 00Jan12 000ctO9 01Mar15 000ctlO 01Mar15 We recommend the report for the period 12 January 2000 to 9 October...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07732-02

    Original file (07732-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Geisler, Pfeiffer and Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 20 March 2003 , and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. c. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office having cognizance over enlisted performance has commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request has merit and warrants...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2686 14

    Original file (NR2686 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hedrick, Marquez and Sproul, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 October 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. In enclosure (4), PERS-32, the NPC office with cognizance over fitness reports, has commented to the effect that both contested fitness reports should be removed. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4852 14

    Original file (NR4852 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 5. PERS-007 memo dtd 6 Apr 15 2 The Board, consisting of Messrs reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 16 April 2015, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. e. Inenclosure (4), PERS-00J, the NPC Assistant Legal Counsel, commented to the effect that the contested document should be removed, as “no evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10301-09

    Original file (10301-09.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 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). The Board, consisting of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07603-02

    Original file (07603-02.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 his request dated 12 August 1985 for reassignment for humanitarian reasons “and all personal information involving this package.” Copies of pertinent documents appearing in Petitioner’s official microfiche record are at Tab A. (2), PERS-4OHH, the Navy Personnel c. In correspondence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03466-03

    Original file (03466-03.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 OPNAV 5350-2 Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report (DAAR) dated 17 November 1992, concerning drug screening. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Adams, Geisler and Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 August 2003, and pursuant to its regulations, determined...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08467-08

    Original file (08467-08.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 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...