Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05223-02
Original file (05223-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE  NAVY 

BOARD  FOR  C O R R E C T I O N   OF  NAVAL  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   DC  20370-5100 

HD: hd 
Docket No:  05223-02 
22 April 2003 

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. 

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. 

A  three-member panel of the Board  for Correction of  Naval  Records, sitting in executive 
session, considered your  application on  17  April 2003.  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 dated 6 December 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.  The reporting senior's statement, some two years after the fact, that 
the contested original report was  "too harsh" did  not persuade the Board that the original 
report was either erroneous or unjust.  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 

Enclosure 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND 

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE 

MILLINGTON TN 380SS-0000 

1610 
PERS-3 1 1 
6 December 2002 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Via:  PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB) 

Subj:  OS2 (S 

Ref  (a)  BUPERSINST 16 10.1 0 EVAL Manual 

Encl:  (1)  BCNR File 

1.  Enclosure (1) is returned.  The member requests the removal of his performance evaluation 
for the period  16 March 1999 to  15 March 200 and replace it with a supplemental report 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 
with the member's  statement and reporting senior's  endorsement, the  supplemental evaluation 
and cover letter. 

b.  The report in question is a Periodic/Regular report. 

c.  Although the  supplemental report  and cover letter was  filed in the member's  record the 
supplemental material was  filed  in  error.  There were  three  members  in  the  summary group, 
tli~l~fore, per reft.l,cme (a); all membcrs in the summary group must be supplemented.  We have 
removed  the  supplemental report  and  cover  letter  and  returned  it  to  the  reporting  senior  for 
correction and resubmission. 

d.  Even  if  the  supplemental report  had  been  submitted per  reference  (a),  we  would  not 
recommend  the  supplemental report replace the original report.  We  provide reporting seniors 
with  the  facility  to  add  material  to  report  already  on  file,  not  replace  them.  Once  the 
supplemental  material  is  accepted  for  file they  provide  a  complete picture  of  the  member's 
performance  as  first  evaluated,  and  then  after  the  reporting  senior  had  the  opportunity  to 
reconsider. 

e.  When the supplemental report is returned we will have it filed in the member's  digitized 

record and file the supplementary material for the other members in the summary group. 

3.  We recommend the member's record remain unchanged except as indicated above. 

performance 
Evaluation Branch 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08557-01

    Original file (08557-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | 01286-03

    Original file (01286-03.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 original enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 September 2001 to 15 September 2002 and the letter of transmittal forwarding both a supplemental report for the same period and a "FitreplEval Summary Letter," so that the supplemental report will be the only report in his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02481-02

    Original file (02481-02.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. 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 | CY2002 | 09369-02

    Original file (09369-02.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. 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 | CY2005 | 03461-05

    Original file (03461-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    03461-05 4 April 2006 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD R Ref: (a) 10 U.S~C. 3 (1) Block 20: Change from “MINS” to “PINS.” (2) Block 43 *36: Change to read “- [PFA] Results: APR 03 P/NS (1st failure) and OCT 03 P/NS (2nd failure) CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting partial relief, specifically, the requested correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00324-01

    Original file (00324-01.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. The member requests the removal of his original fitness report for the period1 February 1998 to 3 1 January 1999 and replace it with a supplemental report. Neither the reporting senior nor the member has provided evidence that retention of the original would constitute an error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02285-02

    Original file (02285-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. Although the Board voted not to file the supplemental report in your record without the required cover letter, you may submit this report to future selection boards. The report in question is a Periodic/Regular report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08296-07

    Original file (08296-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the member requests the fitness reports be replaced with the correct original report. f. The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted a supplement fitness report for entry in member’s OMPF and it has been posted to member’s PSR.g. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05575-02

    Original file (05575-02.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. The report in question is a Periodic/Regular report. c. We cannot administratively remove the fitness report in question and replace it with the report provided with the member material to fitness reports already on file, not replace them.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07681-07

    Original file (07681-07.rtf) 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. 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...