NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07763-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 2006. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 3 November 2005, a copy of which is attached. The member requests the removal of his performance evaluation for the period 16 March 1996 to 30 September 1996.2.Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01148-06
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on theapplicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.Sincerely,W. The member requests the report be submitted to him by another reporting senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00633-06
Petitioner contends the contested report, submitted on her detachment, violated the prohibitions in Chief of Naval Operations Instruction 6000.1B against adverse performance evaluations by reason of pregnancy or performance evaluation comments on pregnancy.d. e. Per enclosure (2), the uncorrected report in question was accepted as originally submitted to the member’s record, attached with an NAVPERS 1616/23 (Memo) over 9 months after the report had been issued to the member. The comments...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01127-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 10 March 2008, a copy of which is attached. 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. The reporting senior signed the evaluation report on 16 March.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06010-05
e. Enclosure (1) includes a three-page statement from Petitioner dated 4 April 2005 in reply to the contested report, and the reporting senior’s letter of 4 May 2005 in response to Petitioner’s statement (both in his enclosure (2) to his application) . That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report and related material: Period of Report Date of Report Reporting Senior From To 31 Mar 05 CDR 16Sep04 1Apr05 USN b. The member requests his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07690-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 2006. 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. The member submitted a statement, however, it was unsuitable for filing as it was not endorsed by the report senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11211-07
The Board also considered your fax letter dated 20 February 2008.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.Specifically regarding the contested fitness report for 16 September 2005 to 14 August 2006, the Board agreed with you that the reporting senior failed to provide the required narrative justification for the adverse marks assigned. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05966-06
A review of the member’s headquarters record revealed the report in question is not on file, however, a copy of the report is present in enclosure (1). We recommend the member’s reporting senior be required to correct the report by changing the promotion recommendation in block 45 to “Significant Problems” as required by reference (a), and the member should be required to sign the report and prepare a Statement to the Record if he so desires. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVY PERSONNEL...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05819-06
The member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement are both included in the member’s record. In this case, the reporting senior assigned the member a promotion recommendation of “Promotable,” which in no way equates to deficient performance. Concur with comments and recommendations found in reference (a)2 After examinationDD Form 149, we find no request that is actionable by PERS-480does not request that her failures of selection be removed nor does she request a special...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02326-06
02326-06 16 October 2006This 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 naval record be corrected by modifying or removing the fitness report for 11 June to 30 December 2005. You specifically requested, if the report is to be retained, raising the overall trait average (block 45) to “4.83” (on a five-point scale) or ‘5.0.” Although you indicated the...