DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No:
11 February 2002
551501
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 February 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 dated
23 October 2001, a copy of which is attached.
Your allegations of error and
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 or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the advisory opinion.
reports violated the Privacy Act, title 5, United States Code, section
provision of law. 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.
They were unable to find the contested performance evaluation
552a, or any other
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.
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
In this regard, 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 NAV
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
Y
1616
PERS-3 1
23 October 2001
I
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via:
PERSBCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)
Ref (a) BUPERSINST
1616.9A EVAL Manual
Encl: (1) BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal of his performance evaluation
report for the period 2 October 1992 to 3 April 1993 and 4 April 1993 to 30 September 1993.
2. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following:
a. A review of the member
’s headquarters record revealed the reports in question to be on
file. Both reports are signed by the member acknowledging the contents of each and his right to
submit a statement. The member indicated he did desire to submit a statement, however, NPC
has not received the member
’s statements and reporting senior
’s endorsement.
b. The performance evaluation for the period 2 October 1992 to 3 April 1993 is a
Transfer/Regular report and the performance evaluation for the period 4 April 1993 to 30
September 1993 is a Periodic/Regular report. The member alleges it was wrong for the reporting
senior to make note of a medical condition and was in violation of Navy Regulations and United
States Code.
c. Per reference (a), the instruction in effect at the time of the reports states;
“Medical
Reports and Summaries. Do not quote from medical reports or summaries and do not mention
medical conditions (including pregnancy) unless necessary to explain other matters in the report.
d. The reports are procedurally correct. The reports in question do not mention any medical
“recommendation for promotion pending conclusion of
The report only states;
condition.
medical board results and medical rehabilitation.
”
e. The reporting senior is charged with commenting on the performance or characteristics of
each member under his/her command and determines what material will be included in a
performance evaluation.
reporting senior.
The report represents the judgment and appraisal authority of the
f. The reports have been in the member ’s record for more than eight years.
the reports were in error or unjust he could have s
If the member felt
d a statement for inclusion in his record.
g. The member does not prove th
3. We recommend the member’s record remain unchanged.
Performance
Evaluation Branch
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07510-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 September 2002. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 29 October 2001 and 25 March 2002, copies of which are attached. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following: a.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00030-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of your contested fitness report for 1 March to 30 September 1993. 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 warranting removal of the remaining contested fitness report, for 1 March 1991 to 26 April 1992. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08091-02
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. The reporting senior states the member was issued a Letter of Instruction.
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 | CY2002 | 09274-02
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 19 March and 4 and 12 June 2003, copies of which are attached. c. The Bureau of Naval Personnel cannot arbitrarily change the ranking of a member on a “ double ranking ”.It is apparent the member ’s record was changed “Bupers subsequently mandated he provide a fitness report. The member ’s previous report for the period 8 December 1990 to 3 1 October 1991 ranked the member as 3 of 11,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 04514-97
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel dated 19 September and 3 November 1997 and 20 May 1998 with reference (b), copies of which are attached. We cannot determine if the promotion recommendation is in accordance PRT regulations in effect at the time since or if the member could have been recommendation for promotion as it appears the member may have been out of two fitness reports. DSN MSC, USNR, f contact is LCD Pers-601,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05577-00
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. In reviewing petitions that question the exercise of the reporting senior's evaluation responsibilities, we must determine if the reporting senior abused hidher discretionary authority. e. The fact that the performance evaluations for the two previous periods from the same reporting...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08710-00
The fitness report in question is a Periodic/Regular report. The fitness report itself represents the opinions of the reporting senior. Chief as petitioned for advancement to Senior Chief Petty Officer due to a Fitness Report he believes to be unjust.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01647-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 April 2007, a copy of which is attached. A review of the member’s headquarters record revealed the original fitness report and member’s statement with reporting senior’s endorsement to be on file. The reporting senior has submitted in enclosure (1), and we will process the supplemental letter and revised report per the reporting senior’s request and place both documents in the member’s OMPF.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00924-02
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. The member alleges the copy of the concurrent report provided with her petition was mandatory, when the new reporting senior reported onboard she was already TAD, if block- 16 is not marked and any trait is graded, the report is considered observed and all traits must be graded or marked NOB,...