DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 8328-14
16 September 2014
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj:
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149. dtd 13 Aug 13 w/attachments
(2) HOMC JAM2-memo dtd 18 Feb 14
.{(4) Subject’s naval record
1. 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 his naval record be corrected by removal of the
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 21 November 2011 (copy of Unit
Punishment Book (UPB) entry at Tab A to enclosure (1)). He
further requested, by implication, removal of the fitness report
for 14 October to 22 November 2011 (copy at Tab B to enclosure
(1)). Finally, by implication, he requested removal of two
service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries
dated 23 November 2011 (copy at Tab C to enclosure (1)). All of
the contested documents refer to the NUP.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, Grover, and
Ivins, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice
on 10 September 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 the Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies which were available under existing law
and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps office
with cognizance over NJP’s has commented to the effect that
Petitioner's request to remove it has merit and warrants
corrective action. The advisory opinion bases its rationale on
the fact that the NUP was based totally on his self-reporting of
his. driving under the influence of alcohol offense.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board finds an error
warranting relief. In view of the above, the Board directs the
following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION :
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by
removing the NUP of 21 November 2011.
b. That Petitioner’s naval record be further corrected by
removing therefrom the following fitness report and related
material:
Period of Report
Date of Report Reporting Senior From To
c. That there be inserted in Petitioner’s naval record a
memorandum in place of the removed report containing appropriate
data concerning the report; that the memorandum state that the
report has been removed by the 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 board’s may not conjecture or draw
any inference as t to the nature of the report.
ad. That Petitioner's record be further corrected by
“-. removing the two service record page 11 (“Administrative ‘Remarks
-.€1070)") entries dated 23 November 2011 .° This is to be
accomplished by physically removing the page 11 on which the
entries appear, or completely obliterating the entries so they
cannot be read, rather than merely lining through them.
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.
2
£. 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.
Crone, Dong,
BRIAN J. GEORGE
Recorder
5. Pursuant to.the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(¢) 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
Executive. Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3743-13
Finally, by implication, he also requested removing the page 11 entry dated 3 August 2011. 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. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11(b) (“Administrative Remarks...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4667 14
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the NJP of 15 November 2012. b. 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 record in the future. d. 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...
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 | 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 | NR2815 14
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 recora be corrected by removing the fitness report for 25 February to 4 July 2011 (copy at Tab A} and the service record page 11b (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 26 May 2011 {copy at Tab B). The Board, consisting of Messrs. George, Hicks and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and...
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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR4525 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 service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 9 September 2011, a copy of which is at Tab A. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Boyd, Genteman and Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 17 April 2014, and pursuant to its...
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)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4610 14
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)") entries dated 29 June and 19 July 2011, copies of which are at Tab A. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Boyd, Genteman and Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 17 April 2014, and pursuant to its...