D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E 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 N A V Y 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
HD:hd
Docket No: 08557-01
1 8 June 2002
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, that
your original fitness report for 1 February to 13 December 1996 be removed and replaced by
the supplemental report for the same period dated 14 November 2001.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 13 June 2002. 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 (NPC) dated 25 March 2002, 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 were unable to find that the reporting senior misinterpreted the
guidance pertaining to the fitness report system. They particularly noted that the revision you
requested would require moving one of your two peers down, from "Must Promote" to
"Promotable," in block 42 ("Promotion Recommendation"); and that NPC has not received
any letter-supplements from the reporting senior changing the rankings of your peers in
accordance with the supplemental report. Annex P, paragraph P-4 of enclosure (2) to Bureau
of Naval Personnel Instruction 1610.10, concerning supplementary material for members in
pay grades E-5 and above, states "If supplementary material changes the member's Promotion
Recommendation summary Group, supplements must be submitted i n the same package for
all other members affected [emphasis added]." In view of the above, your application has
--
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished on request.
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.
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
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5 7 2 0 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON T N 3 8 0 5 5 - 0 0 0 0
1610
PERS-3 1 1
25 March 2002
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via: PERSIBCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)
Subj: L
fkf: (a) BUPERSINST 16 10.10 EVAL Manual
13ncl: ( 1 ) BCNR File
1 . Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests to have his original fitness report for the
period 1 February 1996 to 13 December 1996 removed from his record and replace it with a
supplemental report or letter supplement for the same period.
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 file.
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. PERS-311 has not received the
supplemental report
e letter supplements for the other member's in the
summary group. The member provided a copy of the supplemental report with his petition.
b. The report in question is a Detachment of IndividuaVRegular report. The member alleges
the report does not accurately reflect his professional performance.
c. We provide reporting seniors with the facility to add material to fitness reports already on
file, not replace them. Substitution of the revised report for the original report should only be
accomplished when the member demonstrates that retention of the original report would
constitute an error or injustice. Even though the reporting senior recommended substitution of
the report, we do not feel it is appropriate.
d. The member was selected for promotion and positions of increasing responsibility with the
report in his record. The fact that the member perceives the fitness report to be career damaging
is not sufficient reason to remove the report.
e. The fitness report has been in the member's record for five years. If the member believed
the report was in error or unjust, timely submission of correction was in order.
.
f. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error.
3. We recommend the member's record remain unchanged.
'F I - L V. ."I
I
I
I U I L U b
Evaluation Branch
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09369-02
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. d. The member provided a Fitness Report Letter-Supplement with his petition for the report ending 30 March 1998. The letter is not signed by the reporting senior, and not submitted within two years after the ending date of the report.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05223-02
It is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has entered in your naval record both the reporting senior's letter of 26 February 2002, transmitting the revised enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 March 1999 to 15 March 2000, and the revised report. 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. c. Although the supplemental...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 05732-98
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's requested a letter supplement be the promotion recommendation. Only the reporting senior who signed the original fitness report may submit supplementary material for file in the member's record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02481-02
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. c. We cannot administratively make the requested changes to the member's performance trait marks or change the member's promotion recommendation. Only the reporting senior who signed the original report may submit supplementary material for file in the member's record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02666-00
In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations opinion furnished by the Navy 2oo0, a copy of which is Personnel Command dated 19 June attached. ” c. The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted and filed the supplemental report. The fact that the revision is a better report should have no bearing on whether the original is retained or removed: W e make provisions for the submission of supplementary material concerning fitness reports so that the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00146-02
in the report of the PERB in concluding no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. Removal of the following fitness reports was requested: a. Lieutenant Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) denied his request for removal of the Annual fitness reports of 960801 to 970731 and 970801 to 980731. ailed selection on the FY-02 USMC on Board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00839-02
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E NAVY BOARD F O R C O R R E C T I O N OF NAVAL R E C O R D S 2 NAVY ANNEX W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0 BJG Docket No: 839-02 25 February 2002 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. As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has directed the requested correction of Petitioner's...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07681-07
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. F The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted a supplemental fitness report fom entry in member’s OMPF and it has been posted to member’s PSR g. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error. We recommend no further action be taken by the Board for Corrections of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07858-07
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. Administrative changes correct the administrative blocks of the fitness or evaluation report. We recommend no further action be taken by the Board for Corrections of Naval Records as the member’s record has already been corrected administratively.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, AFBCMR Appeals and SSB Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPAB, states that the previous and subsequent EPRs that applicant submits are not germane to this appeal. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states, in summary, that the statements he submitted all agree that the contested report was not written accurately and did not include specific...