DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 04642-08
12 December 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.
You requested, in effect, removing the "Must Promote" (second
best of five possible marks in block 45 (“Promotion
Recommendation-Individual”) performance evaluation report for 16
March to 15 November 2005, signed by the reporting senior on 30
November 2005 and by you on 14 December 2005, and filing in its
place the "Early Promote" (best possible mark in block 45) |
performance evaluation report for the same period, signed by the
same reporting senior on 20 November 2005 and by you on 28
November 2005, a copy of which you provided with your
application
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 December 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
19 June 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.
The Board particularly noted that the contested report was
submitted after the report you want filed in its place. A
previous version of a performance evaluation report, not
submitted by the reporting senior for file in a member's record,
is superseded by the later report of record and is, therefore,
invalid. 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.
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,
angus)
W. DEAN PFETRF
-Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02330-07
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 | CY2014 | NR2458 14
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 original enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2011 to 15 August 2012, signed by Lieutenant Commander H. R. F---, Supply Corps, U. S. Navy Reserve, and the evaluation report letter-supplement Gated 25 Ahugust 2013 (copies at Tab B), and replacing them with the...
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 | CY2012 | 04918 12
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 modifying the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 November 2009 to 15 November 2010 (copy at Tab A) to show the mark in block 45 (“Promotion Recommendation - Individual”) as “Must Promote” (second best of five possible marks), rather than “Dromotable” (third best). The Board,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2595 14
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 modifying the enlisted performance evaluation ret for 16 November 2011 to 15 November 2012 (copy at Tab A) by removing, from block 43 (*Comments on Performance”), ‘“[Petitioner] had declined to reenlist therefore missing deployment of his unit Therefore he is not recommended for retention.” and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03461-05
03461-05 4 April 2006 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD R Ref: (a) 10 U.S~C. 3 (1) Block 20: Change from “MINS” to “PINS.” (2) Block 43 *36: Change to read “- [PFA] Results: APR 03 P/NS (1st failure) and OCT 03 P/NS (2nd failure) CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting partial relief, specifically, the requested correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00656-09
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 fitness report of record for 1 November 2007 to 8 August 2008 signed by Petitioner on 11 August 2008 (copy at Tab A) and the reporting senior's letter-supplement dated 24 November 2008 (copy at Tab B) and filing in their place the more favorable fitness report for the same period...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR642-13
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Dikeman, Gorenflo and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6 June 2013, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. The corrected report marks Petitioner “Early Promote” (best) in block 45 and marks him alone in block 46. d. Inenclosure (2), PERS-32, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office with cognizance over enlisted performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00266-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2008. Regarding the report for 16 March to 24 October 2007, the Board Gid not find the "Promotable" (third best) promotion recommendation conflicting with the remainder the report, nor could the Board find the reporting senior’s second recommendation for your conversion to career counselor invalidated the report. Consequently, when applying for a...