Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02965-01
Original file (02965-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 2965-01
22 June 2001

 

 

Dear A i

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 19 June 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.

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.

The Board found that you were commissioned an ensign in the Naval
Reserve on 16 May 1993. During the next seven years, you were
designated a naval aviator, augmented into the Regular Navy,
promoted to lieutenant, and otherwise served in an excellent
manner. On 8 June 1960 you reported aboard the USS PINE ISLAND
(AV 12). From that date until 22 September 1962 you received six
consecutive adverse or marginal fitness reports from four
different reporting seniors.

You reported to your next duty station on 26 October 1962. The
subsequent fitness reports show excellent to outstanding
performance of duty. However, because of the poor fitness
reports, you failed of selection to the grade of lieutenant
commander on two occasions. Due to the two failures of selection
your discharge from the Navy was required. You were honorably
discharged on 30 June 1964 and paid severance pay in the amount
of $13,750.00.

You contend in your application that the executive officer on the
PINE ISLAND was notorious throughout the Navy for ruining
officer's careers and you were not the only one who received
adverse fitness reports at that time. You believe that the
injustice that was done to you can only be rectified by placing
you on the retired list.

Based on the lack of any corroborating evidence the Board was
unable to conclude that four different reporting seniors would
all submit fitness reports that did not accurately reflect your
performance and conduct. Accordingly, 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00156-01

    Original file (00156-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | 08232-00

    Original file (08232-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | 06177-06

    Original file (06177-06.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. Subsequently he petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to modify CD report 19901101 to 19901221, CH report 19901222 to 19910327, CH report 19910823 to 19920510 and TR report 19920511 to 19920816 and to remove his failure’of selection. The PERB concluded that the petitioned...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05598-01

    Original file (05598-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps Deputy Director Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADGUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD GUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 CMT 28 Aug 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION; CASE OF MAJO SMCR in the case of .Ol Aug...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05819-06

    Original file (05819-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement are both included in the member’s record. In this case, the reporting senior assigned the member a promotion recommendation of “Promotable,” which in no way equates to deficient performance. Concur with comments and recommendations found in reference (a)2 After examinationDD Form 149, we find no request that is actionable by PERS-480does not request that her failures of selection be removed nor does she request a special...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05333-01

    Original file (05333-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Keport Reporting Senior Period of Report 22 Jan 99 980801 to 981231 (CH) There will be inserted in your Naval record a memorandum in 2. review ailed + Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to remove the Change of Reporting Senior Fitness Report for the period 980801 to 981231. equests...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01974-00

    Original file (01974-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has granted your requests to file a clear copy of the fitness report for 18 May 1981 to 4 February 1982, remove the reviewing officer comments from that report, and remove part of a sentence from the report for 30 March to 9 May 1983. fitness reports was requested: Removal of the a. b. Board is directing the complete removal of the Reviewing Officer comments furnished by Colonel Julian since reference contained no provision to allow...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00511-01

    Original file (00511-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 04368-01

    Original file (04368-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    request for the By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at (3), this Headquarters provide encl ith Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY ,._iDQUARTERS UNITLD STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2 1 MAY 2001 From: To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C Per the reference, 1. has reviewed allegations of error and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04402-01

    Original file (04402-01.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 fitness report for 3 August 1995 to 31 May 1996, a copy of which is at Tab A. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner’s request to strike his failure of selection for promotion has commented to the effect...