DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No: 00803-00
29 June 2001
Dear Command C0
Annex A, for a peer group of 14 lieutenants. While they recognized your assertion of
mistreatment by the weapons officer might well be correct, they were unable to find that the
contested reports, submitted by the commanding officer, were unfair or inaccurate; they were
not persuaded that your treatment by the weapons officer impaired your performance.
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.
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 demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosures
LOGO? OO
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
1610
PERS-311
2 May 2000
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
: Via: PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-00ZCB)
a
Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 1610.10 EVAL Manual
Encl: (1) BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal of his original fitness reports for
the period 28 October 1994 to 29 November 1996 during his tenure aboardiit
4).
2. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following:
a. 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. The member indicated he did not desire to submit a
statement.
b. The member alleges he was verbally abused, physically assaulted, constantly harassed, and
fear of retribution. In reviewing petitions that question the exercise of the reporting senior’s
evaluation responsibilities, we must determine if the reporting senior abused his/her discretionary
authority. For us to recommend relief, the petitioner has to show that either there is no rational
support for the reporting senior’s action or that the reporting senior acted for an illegal or
improper purpose. The petitioner must do more than just assert the improper exercise of
discretion; he/she must provide evidence to support the claim. I do not believe Lieutenant
Mest ne so. The fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior.
Nothing provided in the petition shows that the reporting senior acted for illegal or improper
purposes or that the reports lacked rational support. All three fitness reports appear to be
procedurally correct.
c. The member further alleges that a personality conflict existed between himself and his
immediate supervisor. He suggests that the reporting senior was influenced by the supervisor that
resulted in an inaccurate assessment of Lieutena RRA cformance It is appropriate for
the reporting senior to obtain and consider information from an officer’s immediate supervisor in
, LOMA A
developing a fitness report. However the report is developed, it represents the judgment and
appraisal authority of the reporting senior.
d. A fitness report does not have to be consistent with previous or subsequent reports. It
represents the judgment and appraisal responsibility of the reporting senior.
e. The member used an Article 138 Complaint of Wrongs to support his contentions,
however, the member did not provide a copy of the final results with his petition.
« f. Failure of selection or enhancement of promotion opportunity does not justify removal of
fitness reports.
g. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error.
Head, Pefformance
Evaluation Branch
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
5420
Pers-85
1 Jun 00
MEMORANDUM FOR BCNR
Via: BUPERS/BCNR Coordinator
Ref: (a) PERS-311 ltr 1610 of 2 May 00
Encl: (1) BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned recommending disapproval of
II vr ecuest for a special selection board.
2. Reference (a) recommends retention of the fitness reports
for the period 28 October 1994 to 29 November 1996. I concur
with that recommendation. Barring removal of those fitness
reports no basis exists for t
BCNR Lidison, Officer Promotions
and Enlisted Advancements Division
a special promotion board.
OCEO2-O)
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02984-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The fitness report for the period 1 November 1997 to 3 1 October 1998 is a Periodic/Regular report. The report for the period 1 November 1998 to 10 July 1999 is a The member alleges the reports are erroneous and c. In...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07954-99
A fitness report is an opinion document that reflects the reporting senior’s evaluation of the officer’s performance. The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the 2. Block 41 of the subject fitness FITREP is being submitted due to a A commanding officer has significant In accordance a commanding officer may submit a The member's argument that the special report is unjust seems 4. to be based on his allegation that the commanding officer used the special report as punishment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04195-02
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report and related material: Date of Report 99Apr16 Period of Report Reporting Senior From To iGLISN 98Nov01l 99Apr16 b. 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 a confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of Petitioner's naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00511-01
considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 5 April, 23 July and 16 August 2001, copies of which are attached. The member requests the removal of the following fitness reports. performance and making recommendations concerning promotion and assignment are the responsibilities of the reporting senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08232-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. The member ’s statement and reporting senior ’s endorsement to his fitness report for the period 2 February 1995 to 3 1 January 1996 is filed in his record. As there is no evidence of administrative or material error in the member's record, per ref board is not warranted.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08041-00
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 | 07506-99
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 fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior. Each fitness report represents the judgment of the reporting senior during a particular reporting period.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00156-01
Petitioner again requested removal of both contested fitness reports. The Board finds that Petitioner ’s failures of selection for promotion should be removed. other informal statement by another female officer claiming gender bias and the aforementioned investigation by CINCPACFLT which substantiated Lieutenant Comman II that a Therefore, based on this "preponderan climate of gender bias and perhaps discrimination existed under I recommend the first fitness report in that reporting...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01759-02
This is a strong statement when another senior chaplain in the Navy can make a signed statement that XXXX had the capacity of bias in fitness reports. I recommend XXXX fitness reports dated 94AUG31 to 95JAN31 and 95FEBO to 96JAN31 be removed from his permanent record and that he be considered in-zone at the next regularLieutenant Command r promotion board. Based on the comments provided in references (b) and (c), we believe the fitness reports in question should be removed from Lieuten
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00212-05
The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the period 1 November 2003 to 13 August 2004.2. d. The reporting senior is charged with commenting on the performance or characteristics of each member under his/her command and determines what material will be included in a fitness report. Each fitness report represents the judgment of the reporting senior during a particular reporting period.