Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09248-06
Original file (09248-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-~100
HD hd
Docket No. 09248-06
16 July 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. You requested, in effect, that the date of rank and effective date of your promotion to commander be adjusted from 1 November 2000 to 1 February 2000, to reflect selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 00 Reserve Line Commander Selection Board, vice the FY 01 Reserve Line Commander Selection Board; and that the date of rank and effective date of your promotion to captain be adjusted from 1 July 2007 to 1 July 2006, to reflect selection by the FY 06 Reserve Line Captain Selection Board, vice the FY 07 Reserve Line Captain Selection Board.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 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 (NPC) dated 14 December 2006 and 1 May 2007 and the NPC e-mail dated 6 July 2007, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered your letters dated 18 May (sic) 2007 and 7 June 2007. Finally, the Board considered the Reports of Proceedings in the cases of four other Navy Reserve officers (docket numbers 7693—02, 5846-02, 3243-03 and 10073-03)

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 found your case was distinguishable from the others in which relief had been granted, because you were within flow point guidelines for both commander and captain. 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 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


Enclosures

































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


                                             5420
                                                                                                    PERS—480/0963
                                                                                                   14 Dec 06
MEMORANDUM FOR   EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-31C)
        

         Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN CASE OF

End:     (1) BCNR File 09248-06
1.       Enclosure (1) is returned recommending disapproval of
          request to have her CDR date of rank adjusted to 01 February 2000 and CAPT date of rank adjusted to 1 July 2006.

2.       The transition of officers from the 1705 community to 1105 community occurred in December 1999 date of rank to LCDR was 1 March 1995, with a 1705 designator. The FY-00 Commander Promotion Selection Board zones for 1705s were 1 July 1993 to 1 July 1994; therefore she was not an eligible for the FY-00 Commander Promotion Selection Board since she was still a 1705 ~ back to 1105 occurred in December 1999. The FY-O 1 Commander Promotion Selection Board zones for 1105s were 1 September 1995 to 1 August 1996, therefore ~ an above zone not previously considered eligible receiving her first look for selection consideration to commander.
~         properly considered before the FY-O 1 Commander Promotion Selection Board as well as the FY-07 Captain Promotion Selection Board. She was found to be best and fully qualified and was given a date of rank appropriate for those boards.



Director, Officer Career
Progression Branch



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





 5420
PERS 492
1 May 07
MEMORANDUM FOR   EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-3lC)
Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


Ref:     (a) BCNR Memo 5420 PERS-31C of 2 Apr 07
End:     (1) BCNR File No. 09248-06
1.       We are returning enclosure (1) with the following observations and comments that P etition could be approved with conditions.
petitioning for an adjustment to her year grouping and dates of rank to Commander and subsequently to Captain. The petitioner asserts that she suffered an injustice when the Fleet Support Of finder Community (FSO) was detached from the Unrestricted Line Community (URL) in 1995, and then recombined with the URL in 1999.
3.       During the reintegration of the FSO community into the URL, certain individuals fell outside the SECNAV flow point guidelines. Specifically cited in this case are Captains and however did not fall outside the established guidelines. SECNAS7IffST 1420.1 addresses flow points for active duty that are mirrored through the Reserve Component running mate system. The flow point for commander is 16 years with a variance of plus or minus one year. The petitioner was promoted to commander at the 16 year point and was within the flow point guidelines. Additionally, SECNAVINST 1420.1 establishes the promotion flow point to Captain at the 22-year point plus or minus one year. status, she is due to promote to captain at the 22-year 7-month point, again meeting the requirements outlined by SECNAV.







Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATI ON


3.       Although SECNAV established flow points, she was chronologically in-zone for commander and subsequently captain one fiscal year behind officers with the same commissioning and promotion history in the URL. Due to uncertainty regarding the actual promotion status had she been eligible for those boards, we do not recommend adjusting the date of rank to commander as requested. However, given her selection status to captain in FY-07, the Navy could potentially adjust her 0-6 date of rank to 1 August 2006 with a corresponding active and inactive precedence number. Additionally, the cases of Captains ~ ~, and were recommended as administrative changes only with no changes in monetary benefits. The changes afforded these officers the opportunity to be eligible earlier for the commander selection boards ~ delayed in eligibility, the date of rank adjustment could be accompanied by monetary benefits associated with the new date of rank to captain if warranted by law or policy.


Commander, Reserve Personnel
Management Division
Reserve Officer Community Manager
(PERs-492)
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08560-01

    Original file (08560-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting i n executive session, considered your application on 13 June 2002. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, theburden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The projection for her next in zone eligibility for captain puts her at the 23 year mark, which is also one year above the notional flow point and in accordance with SECNAVINST...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07693-02

    Original file (07693-02.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 changing her commander date of rank to restore her relative seniority in her officer community. They recommend adjusting her date of rank to 1 June 1998. The petitioner promoted to commander at the month point in keeping with her running mates and within flow point guidelines of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07431-00

    Original file (07431-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the Navy Personnel Command the memorandum for the record dated 5 March 2001, and the NPC opinion dated 6 March 2001 with enclosure, copies of which are attached. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the PERS-85 advisory opinion dated 6 March 2001 in finding that your date of rank should not be adjusted because you would not have rated an adjustment when you came on active duty, had you requested one. r October 1996 of rank adjustment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09639-07

    Original file (09639-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 9639-07

    Original file (9639-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09639-07

    Original file (09639-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In enclosure (6), the NPC office responsible for officer promotions has commented to the effect that since the fitness report in question is valid, Petitioner’s request for a special selection board has no merit. The documentation Petitioner provided at enclosure (3), especially the statistics, convinces the majority that Petitioner might well have deserved to be ranked above, rather than below, her peer in the contested fitness report. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07671-01

    Original file (07671-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Performance Evaluation Review uested an advisory opinion in the case of Capta Captain requesting a date of rank adjustment to 990101 and a special selection board. The following facts are germane to the case: a. Captain as selected for Captain by the FY99 USMC Captain Promotion Selection Board. )c+~ & d. Reference (a) states the SECNAV is authorized to convene a special selection board to consider cases of "officers who were in or above the promotion zone before a promotion selection...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002386

    Original file (20090002386.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that her United States Navy Reserve (USNR) selection for promotion to 0-4 be transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and she be promoted accordingly. He states that the applicant was on the list of officers selected for promotion to the next higher grade in the USNR, but was separated from the USNR prior to the approval of that selection board's promotion list. Absent any evidence that the promotion list the applicant was on was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01135-06

    Original file (01135-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJG Docket No: 1135-06 19 December 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 to show that you were not removed from the Fiscal Year 2003 or 2004 Lieutenant All Fully Qualified Officers Promotion List and that you were...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01442

    Original file (BC-2007-01442.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01442 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 NOVEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her promotion to major in the Air Force Reserve be transferred to the Active Duty Air Force with an effective pin-on date of 5 Feb 08. In order for the promotion to be valid and...