Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05140-06
Original file (05140-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2037O-5100

 HD hd
Docket No. 05140-06
1 March 2007







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 1 March 2007. 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 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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions. Accordingly, 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, he burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,






Enclosures
                                             DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
 5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
 MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000       

               1610
          PERS-311
          9 September 2006
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS

Via:     PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-3LC2)



Ref:     (a) BUPERS1NST 1610.10 (EVALMAN)

End:     (1) BCNR File 05 140-06 w/Service record

1.       Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal or upgrade of his evaluation report for the period of 16 March 2003 to 15 March 2004. Additionally, the member requests advancement to the next higher pay grade and that advancement to be back dated.

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’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement are both included in the member’s record.

b.       The fitness report covering the period of 16 March 2003 to 15 March 2004 is a Periodic/Regular report. The member alleges based on his decision to cross rate and extreme family problems he was unable to ESWS qualify in the prescribed time limit, which is 18 months.

c.       The report is a valid report.

d.       The member made application to cross rate to the GSM rating and was selected. The reporting senior’s first endorsement to the member’s statement adequately addressed his consideration of the circumstances surrounded by the member’s personal life and the member’s inability to qualify ESWS. The reporting senior affirmed in his endorsement of the statement that the contents of the report accurately reflected his view of the member’s performance.

e.       The reporting senior is charged with commenting on the performance or characteristics of each member under his/her command and determine what material will be included in a fitness report. The contents and grades assigned on a fitness report are at the discretion of the reporting senior.


 f.       The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error.
3.       We recommend the member’s record remain unchanged.





By direction






























DE PARTMENT OF THE NAV Y
                  NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
                  5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
                  MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
1430
Ser 4811E9/ 602
06 OCT 06
MEMORANDUM FOR CONGRESSIONAL MATTERS (PERS-31C)

 Subj:    COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIQNS IN THE
Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 1430.16E

End: (1) BCNR File #05140-06

1. Based on policy and guidelines established in reference (a), enclosure (1) is returned recommending disapproval.

 2. requesting backdated GSM1 advancement to match advancement that he could have achieved in the former NM rating.

3. Official record reviews indicated that member was approved for conversion from the NM rating to GSM rating under the Selective Conversion and Reenlistment (SCORE) program on 01 July 2001. Under this program, member attended GSM “A” School for conversion and graduated in 03 May 2002. The conversion was a voluntary under the SCORE incentive program.

4. The Minimum Multiple Required (MMR) for advancement is different from each rating. Have the member stayed in his former rating he could have advanced by now. That can not be determined just by comparing NMR since this multiple is established based on available quotas. Member submitted and accepted for conversion to the GSM rating based on his own decision.

 5. This is an advisory memorandum for the use by the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only. Point of contact is PSCS(SW/AW) Milton Lewis, DSN 882-3238 or email milton. lewis@navy.mil .


                                                                                          (Pers-481)
 By direction

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02301-06

    Original file (02301-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2301-06 12 Apr 07This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2007. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05193-06

    Original file (05193-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement are both included in the member’s record.b. The reporting senior’s first...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03061-07

    Original file (03061-07.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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPc memorandum 1430 Ser 811E9/283 of 29 May 2007, a copy of each is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06342-06

    Original file (06342-06.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. The member’s statement and the reporting senior 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04773-04

    Original file (04773-04.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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 1430 Ser 481 1A1/305, 8 July 2004.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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07737-06

    Original file (07737-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    7737-06 1 Nov 06This is in reference o your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04169-01

    Original file (04169-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They also considered your counsel's letters dated 25 June 2001 with enclosures, 25 July 2001 with enclosure, and 23 March 2002. For us to recommend relief, the petitioner has to show that either there is no rational support for the reporting senior's action or that the reporting senior acted for an illegal or improper purpose. In this case, the reporting senior makes it clear in references (b) and (c) and his endorsement to the member's statement his reason for submitting the reports as they did.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06444-06

    Original file (06444-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Nava1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2006. 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. This is an advisory memorandum for the use by the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02924-02

    Original file (02924-02.PDF) Auto-classification: Denied

    application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The member ’s statement and reporting senior member’s digitized record. The report in question is a Special/Regular report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01679-01

    Original file (01679-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...