DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSN
BJG
Docket No: 6239-01
21 March 2002
-
_^.k_
.
_
_..-.t-
-
.
This is in
provisions
rc~l‘et-ence
10
your
01‘ title
of‘
10
:lpplic;\rion
101- correction
df your naval record pursuant to the
11~ United
Stares ( ‘ode, section 1552.
three-nienlher panel
01‘ the
A
session,
inSjustice
applicable
consisted
naval
considerc4
17
Board
;lpplic;~~ion
;\ccord;mce
this
liar- Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
OII
:!
Your allegations of error and
wilh
130:11-d. Documentary material considered by the Board
I March 2002.
;tdministrative regulations and procedures
J’OUI-
in
procevtlings
consiclcrc’d
\vcrc
revicwetl
lo
the
your application.
;IIKI
ic~bl~
opinions
Janttary 2002, copies of which are attached.
appl
th~b advisory
HII~ 22
regulations and policies.
01’
togetllcr
sl;ilulc’s,
2001
ot‘
record
with all material submitted in support thereof, your
i‘urnisllc‘tl by the Navy Personnel Command dated
In addition, the Board
Dece~nbc~-
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 dated
17 December 2001 in concluding no modification of the
performance evaluation in question was warranted.
backdating your advancement to electronics technician second class
In view
members
the above, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
ot’
lhe panel will be furnished upon request.
Therefore, they had no basis for
(En), pay grade E-5.
of
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
presmnption of regularity attaches to all official
imporrant to keep in mind
thar a
s .
recorcl
burden is
injustice.
Consequenlly,
on the applicant to demonstrate the
when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
existence of probable material error or
Sincerely,
W . DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
_.....*t
_
-
.
Enclosures
DEPARTMENT OF THE
N AVY
P E R S ONNEL COMMAN
5720 INTEGRITY DRIV
MILLINGTON TN 38055000
NAV Y
E
D
0
1610
PERS-3 11
17 December 2001
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via:
PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB)
Subj: E
Ref: (a) BUPERSINST
16 10.10 EVAL Manual
Encl: (1) BCNR File
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests his promotion recommendation be changed
on his performance evaluation for the period 1 March 1998 to 1 September 1999.
2. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following:
.member ’s headquarters record revealed the member was an ET3 (E-4) at
a. A review of the
the time of the report.
member ’s headquarters record, we base our opinion on an uncertified copy provided with the
member ’s petition.
Since E-4 and below performance evaluations are not filed in the
b. The report in question
fully appreciate his actions,
promotable is an injustice.
is Special/Regular report. The member alleges the report does not
abilities, commendations, and the promotion recommendation of
c. A performance evaluation is unique to the period being evaluated. The contents and grades
The evaluation of a member
assigned on a report are at the discretion of the reporting senior.
performance and making recommendations concerning promotion and assignments are the
responsibilities of the reporting senior. Nothing provided in the member
that the reporting senior acted improperly, violated requirements, or that he abused his
discretionary authority in evaluating the member
’s performance.
’s
’s petition demonstrates
d. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error.
3. We recommend the member’s record remain unchanged.
Evaluation Branch
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 380550000
Y
1430
Ser 811
22 Jan 0
2
MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECO R DS
(BCNR)
Via:
Assistant for BCNR Matters
(PERS-OOXCB)
Ref:
(a) BUPERSINST
1430.16E
Encl:
(1) BCNR
fil
Based on policy and guidelines established in reference
1.
(a), enclosure (1) is returned recommending disapproval.
Petty
as requested a change to his
2 .
Offic
evaluation of 1
upon this change backdating his advancement to ET2.
has provided a memo of 17 December 2001 stating the subject
evaluation is not in error or unjust and recommends no
changes.
Based on this information, no relief can be
recommended with regards to the petition.
to 1 September 1999, and based
PERS-311
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06189-00
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 | 00511-01
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 08232-00
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 05262-99
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 three enlisted performance evaluation reports for 16 July to 3 November 1998, 4 November 1998 to 3 February 1999, and 4 February to 3 May 1999. The second opinion recommended that her request be approved, stating that she would have been selected for advancement from Cycle 160,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03070-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 December 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discrepancy between the ranking (of "Must Promote") and the written portion of the which states, "Lieutenant Commander as my strongest possible recommendation for early ) there does appear to be some In addition, there...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07335-00
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 | CY2006 | 05140-06
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 9 September and 6 October 2006, copies of which are 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. Official record reviews indicated that member was approved for conversion from the NM rating to GSM rating under the Selective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01679-01
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...