Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05664-00
Original file (05664-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT  OF THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F  N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2   NAVY  A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

SMC 
Docket No:  05666-00 
8 March 2001 

This is in  reference to your application for correction of  your naval record pursuant  to  the 
provisions of  title  10 of  the United  States Code, section  1552. 

A  three-member panel of  the Board  for Correction of  Naval  Records, sitting in  executive 
session, considered your application on  8 March 2001.  Your allegations of  error and 
injustice were reviewed in accordance with  administrative regulations and procedures 
applicable to the proceedings of  this Board.  Documentary material considered by  the Board 
consisted of  your application, together with all material submitted in  support thereof, your 
naval record and  applicable statutes, regulations and  policies.  In addition, the Board 
considered the advisory opinion furnished by  the Navy  Personnel Command dated 
21 November 2000, a copy of  which  is attached. 

After careful and  conscientious consideration of  the entire record, the Board  found that the 
evidence submitted was  insufficient to establish the existence of  probable material error or 
injustice.  In this connection, the Board  substantially concurred with  the comments contained 
in the advisory opinion.  They noted  that under Bureau of  Naval Personnel Instruciion 
1610.10, enclosure (2), Annex  A,  for a summary group of  35 chief petty officers, the 
maximum number the reporting senior may  mark  "Early Promote" is seven, and  tho 
maximum total for "Early Promote" and  "Must Promote" is  18.  In view  of  the above, your 
application has been denied.  The names and  votes of  the members of  the panel will be 
furnished upon  request. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of  your  case are such that favorable action cannot be 
taken.  You  are entitled to have the Board  reconsider its decision upon  submission of  new 
and  material evidence or other matter not previously considered by  the Board.  In  this 
regard, it is important to keep in  mind  that a presumption of  regularity attaches to all official 

records.  Consequently, when applying for a correction of an  official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonshate the existence of probable material emr or 
injustice. 

Sincerely, 

W. DEAN PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 

Enclosure  . 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND 

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE 

MILLINGTON TN 380SS-0000 

1610 
PERS-3 1 1 
2 1 November 2000 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECT.OR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Via:  PERSBCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB) 

 

Subj:  B
-

I

'

 

S 

Ref:  (a)  BUPERSINST 1610.10 EVAL Manual 

Encl:  (1)  BCNR File 

1.  Enclosure  (1)  is  returned.  The  member  requests  block-43  be  changed  to  reflect  16 
Promotable,  12  Must  Promote,  and  7  Early  Promote  on  his  fitness  report  for  the  period  16 
September 1998 to 15 September 1999. 

2.  Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following: 

a.  A review of the member's  headquarters record did  not  reveal  the report in question to be 
on file.  The report was received , however, it was rejected due to incorrect summary group.  The 
reports were returned to the reporting senior for correction and resubmission.  The reports were 
returned, however, the summary group was still incorrect.  We are in the process of returning the 
reports again for correction. 

b.  Chi 

questing that block-43  (summary) be changed to reflect  16 Promotables, 
12 Must Promotes, and  7 Early Promotes.  We  can not  administratively make  the  changes the 
member request on a fitness report..  Only the reporting senior who signed the original report may 
submit revised material for file in the member's record. 

c.  Per  reference (a), Annex  (A),  the  summary  group  should  read  17 Promotables,  11 Must 
Promotes,  and  7 Early Promotes.  Once the reporting  senior has corrected the  summary block, 
Chi-record 

will be corrected to reflect the correct change. 

d.  The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error 

~ & d ,  Performance 
Evaluation Branch 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08557-01

    Original file (08557-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Board did not vote to insert any of the reporting senior's supplementary material in your naval record, they noted you could submit it to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. c. We provide reporting seniors with the facility to add material to fitness reports already on file, not replace them.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08041-00

    Original file (08041-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The member provided a copy of her statement and reporting senior’s endorsement with her petition. When the member’s statement and reporting senior’s endorsement is returned and found suitable for filing, we will place it in the member’s digitized record.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00803-00

    Original file (00803-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since the Board found no defect in your performance record, they had no basis to remove your failures by the FY 99 and 00 Line Lieutenant Commander Selection Boards. A review of the member’s headquarters record revealed three fitness reports for the period in question, All three fitness reports are signed by the member acknowledging the contents of each and his right to make a statement. For us to recommend relief, the petitioner has to show that either there is no rational support for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07920-00

    Original file (07920-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    That Petj.tioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report and related material: Date of Report Reporting Senior 98SepO3 Period of Report From To b. On 13 November 1999 the report was The report was returned to the reporting senior for correction and resubmission. A review of the member ’s headquarters record revealed The report was received without the member returned to the reporting senior for correction and tracer action was initiated and the report...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08265-01

    Original file (08265-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (a) "Performance counseling must be provided at the mid-point of the periodic report cycle, and when the report is signed... B.lock 32 of the performance report for the period 99SEPOl to indicates counseling was performed. , , i ‘ ,ci v / “ (2) (3) (4) (5) The member requested the senior member reconsider the performance report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9802722

    Original file (NC9802722.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy ., Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD d. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's naval record be returned to this 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. Reference (c), the reporting senior's statement, appears to contradict itself, in that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06967-00

    Original file (06967-00.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    PERS-832C states that he “was, in fact, convicted of DUI under a Deferred Prosecution agreement and his command had every right to document that event in his service record.” They further state “The fact that he met the required obligations, applied for and received a court dismissal of the charge two years later does not negate the incident.” They conclude that documentation supporting that significant event should remain in the record; and that maintaining such documents is essential to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04989-01

    Original file (04989-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board was unable to find you were denied access to all documentation on which the contested evaluation was based. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00087-98

    Original file (00087-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    states that he signed a "Concurrent" on 14 November 1997, of "Early Promote"; however, report from his regular reporting senior, "Periodic Regular" which he received a promotion recommendation of "Progressing". comments in block 43 of the report in question, that the evaluation being submitted is based on the input from the member's TAD command. The reporting senior d. Based on our review, we feel the reporting senior assigned the member a promotion recommendation of "Progressing" due to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04900-01

    Original file (04900-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (4), Pers-OOJ found evidence of racial bias CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, notwithstanding the contents of enclosure existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action: (2), and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (4), the Board finds the RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitneis reports and related material, including...