Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07125-00
Original file (07125-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

HD: hd
Docket No: 0712540
10 August 2001

Dear Comm

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. You requested, in effect,
removal of your failures by the Fiscal Year (FY) 01 and 02 Line Captain Selection Boards,
leaving in your record your failure by the FY 00 promotion board.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 9 August 2001.
Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this 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 opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated
6 and 27 March 2001, copies of which are attached.

Documentary material considered by the Board

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
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion
dated 6 March 2001 in concluding that no correction of your fitness report record was
warranted. As they were unable to find the contested original fitness report improperly
marked you, and they were likewise unable to find the letter supplement should have been
Li.ne
submitted sooner, they had no grounds to remove your failures by the FY 01 and 02
 
The
In view of the above, your application has been denied.
Captain Selection Boards.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

 or

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

NAVY 

PERSONNEL  

COMMAND

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

MILLINGTON  TN 38055-0000

Y

1610
PERS-3 11
6 March 2001

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via: 

PERSBCNR  Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)

Subj: C

Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 1610.10 EVAL Manual

Encl: (1) BCNR File

I. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests corrections be made to his fitness report for
the period 14 July 1998 to 31 August 1999.

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

a. A review of the member

’s headquarters record revealed the report in question to be on tile.

It is signed by the member acknowledging the contents of the report and his right to submit a
statement. The member did not desire to submit a statement.

b. The report in question is a Periodic/Regular report. The member alleges an administrative

error was made on his fitness report in question concerning his promotion recommendation.

c. The member and the reporting senior refer to changes to the fitness report in question as

administrative changes. Changes to trait marks, promotion recommendations and ranking are not
administrative changes. Such action constitutes a supplementation to the original report. We
provide reporting senior
has come to light since the original report was submitted.

’s with the facility to add additional information to fitness reports that

d. The reporting senior has submitted and we have accepted a Fitness Report Letter

Supplement. The Letter Supplement changed the member
“Must Promote ” to  “Early Promote. ”A Fitness Report Letter Supplement only adds additional
information, it does not replace an original fitness report.

’s promotion recommendation from

e. Commander Gural states the fitness report in question adversely affected his consideration
We do not support changes of record to

for promotion to 06 on the FY-00 promotion board.
improve a member ’s opportunity for promotion or career enhancement.

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

3. We recommend the member

’s

Hea&erformance
Evaluation Branch

UEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

MILLINGTON TN  

38055-0000

MEMORANDUM FOR BCNR

Via:

BUPERS/BCNR Coordinator

Ref:

Encl:

-

(a) Pers-311  memo of 6

Mar 01

(1) BCNR File

Enclosure (1)  

1.
ref (a) and recommending disapproval
request.

is returned

concurr

5420
Pers 85
27 Mar 01

ings of
NR

The fitness report dated 14 Jul 98 

2.
have affected the
FY-00 Active Duty Captain Line Promotion Selection Board, as it
The FY-01 board would have been the first
convened 14 Jan 99.
to review the fitness report in question.

member ’s consideration for promotion

- 31 Jul 99 could not

 

  by the

- 31 Aug 99 fitness report

The  member signed   the 14 Jul 98

3.
acknowledging the contents and declining the opportunity to
The alleged administrative error was
submit a statement.
recognized only after the failure of selection.
to the fitness report in question is dated 11 
the 11 Jan 00 convening of the FY-01 board.
properly screened prior to the board, the error would have been
recognized and attempts to correct it could have been made.

The supplement
Ott  00, well after
If the record were

ecord  before the FY-00 and FY-01 boards was
te and provided a substantially accurate and
the member's naval career.

The removal 
failure of selection for the FY-00 or FY-01 Active Duty

Captain Line Promotion Selection Boards is not warranted.

of.CDR

BCNR Liaison, Officer Promotions
And Enlisted Advancements Division



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06189-00

    Original file (06189-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command, dated 22 November 2000, 15 February and 11 June 2001, and the Medical Corps Officer Community Manager dated 26 April 2001, copies of which are attached.The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 17 April and 18 September 2001. evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. However, this evidence, by itself, did not establish...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07335-00

    Original file (07335-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The fitness reports in question are valid reports. c. The member may request the reporting senior to submit a Fitness Report Letter Supplement or Supplemental Fitness Report to reflect the changes the member requested. selection board.

  • 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 01679-01

    Original file (01679-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2002. The Board was likewise unable to find that the Commander, Naval Surface Reserve Force denied your right to an interview with him; that he inadequately reviewed the DFC documentation; or that he wrongfully concurred with and forwarded the DFC recommendation. Since the Board found that the DFC and related fitness report should stand, they had no...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04456-00

    Original file (04456-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (MSC) Captain Selection Boards; special selection board Naval Reserve MSC Captain Selection Board, by which you You requested, in effect, removal of your failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 through 2003 Medical Service consideration for the FY 2000 were not considered; and amendment of the remedial memorandum now in your naval record, stating you have served on active duty continuously since your discharge from the Regular Navy on 31 January 1990, to show you are “USN” (United...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02984-01

    Original file (02984-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 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 | CY2002 | 07093-00

    Original file (07093-00.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. Ott 1 to 98 that his fitness report for the period of Ott 31 is in error because his mid-term board on the grounds 97 counselina was not term counsel disadvantage. The member requests correction to his fitness report for the period 1 October 1997 to 3 1 October 1998.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08668-00

    Original file (08668-00.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 his naval record be corrected by removing or correcting the fitness report for 1 October 1996 to 12 April 1997, a copy of which is at Tab A. In enclosure (2), the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting removal of the...