DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
HD: hd
Docket No: 04555-02
7 November 2002
@IC USN
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 7 November 2002.
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 opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated
27 September 2002, a copy of which is attached.
30 October 2002 with enclosure.
Your allegations of error and
Documentary material considered by the Board
The Board also considered your letter dated
Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion. As
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
the reporting senior did not forward the original version of your fitness report to NPC, he
was not required to treat the contested report of record as supplemental.
of 29 July 1996 (enclosure (6) to your application), reporting that an officer of your peer
group had been selected for promotion, came out before the end of the reporting period, the
reporting senior was correct to eliminate that officer from your peer group on the basis of the
officer’s change in status.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
In view of the above, your application has been denied. The
Since the message
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
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
In this regard,
and
it is
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
N AVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
1610
PERS-3 11
27 September 2002
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via: PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)
Subj: C
SN,
Ref:
(a) BUPERSINST 16 10.10 EVAL Manual
Encl: (1) BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned.
period 1 November 1995 to 2 August 1996.
The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the
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.
b. The report in question is a Detachment of Reporting Senior/Regular report. The member
alleges the report was submitted in error and unfairly.
c. The report appears to be procedurally correct. The member signed two fitness reports for
the period in question. The first report was signed on 23 July 1996 and the second report was
signed on 25 July 1996. The member contends the first report he signed should be the official
report. A report is not considered official until it has been received examined and found suitable
for filing and placed in the member
’s digitized record.
d. Reference (a), Annex A, states
“A summary group consists of all reports which share all
’
of the characteristics in the following block; 2, 3, 5, 8, 15, 17-19, 21, 22, and 42.
member in a selected promotion status cannot be group with other members in a regular
promotion status. On the first report the member received a promotion recommendation of
“Must Promote ” and the second report changed his promotion recommendation to
The initial report indicated five members in the summary group. Prior to submission one
member in the summary group was selected for promotion; therefore, the summary group
five to four. In a summary group of four, only one member is authorized an
changed from
Promote, one “Must Promote ” and the rest are “Promotable. ”
” Therefore, a
“Promotable ”.
“Early
e. The reporting senior is the judge of the performance of subordinates. While the member
may disagree with the reporting senior ’s evaluation, the reporting senior must make a judgment
and rank each member in the summary group.
promotion recommendation of “Promotable”.
Commander
of the other officers in the summary group.
recommendation he explained his actions in the comment section of the report.
In this case the reporting senior assigned a
Such a ranking does not indicate a failing on
part, but rather the reporting senior gave greater value to the contributions
In an obvious effort to mitigate the promotion
f. It should be noted the member was selected for promotion and positions of increased
responsibility with the report in his record. The fact that the member perceives the report to be
career damaging is not sufficient reason to remove a report.
g. The fitness report has been in Commander
member stated he discovered the alleged error or injustice on 3
was in error or unjust, timely submission of correction was in order.
record for almost six years. The
1 July 1996.
If he felt the report
h. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error.
3. We recommend the member’s record remain unchanged.
Performance
Evaluation Branch
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08557-01
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 | CY2002 | 00899-02
The Board also considered your letter dated 4 October 2002 with enclosures. The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the 2. The fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00803-00
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 | 08247-00
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 1 June to 19 December 1996 and all related correspondence, a copy of which is at Tab A. Petitioner further impliedly requested removal of his failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 01 Lieutenant Commander Staff Selection Board. Notwithstanding the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06046-98
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. In finding that the reporting senior ’s letter to your physical evaluation board did not contradict the contested fitness report, they noted that he expressly acknowledged, in the report, that the “problem” he cited “has not prevented [you] from continuing to carry out [your] routine medical...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9802722
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 | 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 | CY2007 | 09639-07
In enclosure (6), the NPC office responsible for officer promotions has commented to the effect that since the fitness report in question is valid, Petitioner’s request for a special selection board has no merit. The documentation Petitioner provided at enclosure (3), especially the statistics, convinces the majority that Petitioner might well have deserved to be ranked above, rather than below, her peer in the contested fitness report. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09639-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 9639-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...