DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 01127-08
22 September 2008
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 18 September 2008. 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 opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated
10 March 2008, a copy of which is 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 opinion.
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, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000 1610
PERS-311
10 March 2008
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via: PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-3LC2)
Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 1610.10A EVAL Manual
Encl: (1) BCNR File 01127-08 w/Service record
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal of her performance evaluation
report for the period of 16 November 2005 to 15 March 2006.
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 her right to submit a
statement. The member indicated on the report that she did intend to make a statement. The
member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement are not present in the file. Per
reference (a), Chapter 18, the member has two years from the ending date of the report to submit
a statement if she so desires.
b. The report in question is an adverse Special/Regular report. The member alleges the
evaluation report should be removed due to insufficient justification of action. The member
states she the offense she was charged with was dropped for insufficient evidence so there was no
justification for the adverse report. Additionally, the member states she was allowed to go IA
and could not have gone if there was a bad evaluation in her file.
c. The report is a valid report.
d. The report in question states in block 41, Comments on Performance, that the evaluation
was submitted to withdraw her promotion recommendation to Chief Petty Officer. The reporting
senior signed the evaluation report on 16 March. Reference (a), chapter 3, page 3-6,
subparagraph 3-9 (2 d) — Submission or Withdrawal of Enlisted Promotion (Advancement)
Recommendation or Establishment of Performance Mark Average (PMA) authorizes the
submission of a Special Report to document this action taken by the reporting senior. The
evaluation report was accurately prepared and submitted by the reporting senior in accordance
with reference (a).
e. The fact the member was allowed to go on an Individual Augmentation tour has no bearing
on the validity of the evaluation report nor do her previous evaluation reports.
f. Reference (a), Chapter 13, page 13-7; subparagraph 13-12 (a) -General Commenting on
Misconduct, specifically addresses how and when a reporting senior must document details of
misconduct in a member’s performance evaluation report. It allows reporting seniors to ‘include
comments on misconduct whenever the facts are clearly established to the reporting senior’s
satisfaction’.
g 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 fitness
report. The comments and performance trait marks assigned on a report are at the discretion of
the reporting senior. The evaluation of a member’s performance and making recommendations
concerning suitability for advancement and assignments are the responsibility of the reporting
senior.
h. If the member believed the reporting senior prepared the reports in reprisal or in retaliation
he could have filed a complaint of wrongful treatment under one of the processes set up for that
purpose, e.g. Article 138, Navy Hotline, etc.
i. The member does not prove the reports to be unjust or in error.
3. We recommend the member's record remain unchanged.
RANTZ
y direction
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 | CY2007 | 07858-07
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. Administrative changes correct the administrative blocks of the fitness or evaluation report. We recommend no further action be taken by the Board for Corrections of Naval Records as the member’s record has already been corrected administratively.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00042-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. 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. 5420 OPNAV N135 12 JUN 08 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (PERS-31C) Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07580-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory Opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 27 September 2007, a copy of which is 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01225-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 September 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 May 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08254-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 15 November 2007, 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.Sincerely,W. The member states the evaluation report was adverse because of his previous reporting senior contacting the reporting senior at the Transfer Personnel Unit.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08049-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS - 311) dated 30 September 2008, with e-mail regarding PERS-311 contact with the reporting senior, 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 member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement to the fitness report are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11261-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 January 2008, a copy of which is attached. The member’s statement and the reporting senior endorsement are both included in the member’s record. As indicated by the reporting senior on the report, the member was TAD during the some of the reporting period.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10863-06
The Board was likewise unable to find the reporting senior lacked sufficient basis for his finding that you had engaged in “inappropriate conduct.” On the contrary, your statement in reply to the contested fitness report revealed that the reporting senior had “received a letter from a woman [you] had been dating alleging harassment.” 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. “Recently counseled for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07681-07
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. F The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted a supplemental fitness report fom entry in member’s OMPF and it has been posted to member’s PSR g. The member does not prove the report to be unjust or in error. We recommend no further action be taken by the Board for Corrections of...