DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD :hd
Docket No. 07328-08
7 October 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 2 October 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
14 August 2008, a copy of which is attached. The Board also
considered your declarations of 18 August and 15 September 2008
with attachments.
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,
particularly noting the reporting senior's e-mail of 13 August
2008, exhibit K to your declaration of 15 September 2008.
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,
\Saou dey
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE 1610
055-0000
MILLINGTON TN 38 PERS-311
14 August 2008
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Via: PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-31C)
Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 1610.10A (EVALMAN)
Encl: (1) BCNR File 07328-08 w/Service record
1. Enclosure (1) is returned. The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the
period of 26 October 2007 to 30 April 2008. Additionally, the member requests he be provided
with two (2) fitness reports for the same period.
.. 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.
The member acknowledging the contents of the report and his right to submit a statement and
signed the fitness report. The member indicated on the report that he intended to make a
statement. The member’s statement and endorsement are present in the file. The member was
unable to obtain the reporting senior’s endorsement after reasonable effort.
b. The report in question is a non-adverse Periodic/Regular report ending 30 April 2008. The
member alleges the fitness report includes a period that should have been reported on by another
reporting senior. The member alleges there was an agreement for another department to provide
him with a fitness report. Additionally, the member requests two separate fitness reports for the
period in question to be provided to him.
c. The report is a valid report. There is nothing within the member’s petition that he received
transfer orders or a directive to a different command. Had the member received orders he should
have received a Detachment of Individual Report. If the member was attached by directive to the
follow on unit they would have been authorized to submit a Concurrent Report on the member if
not in same common chain of command.
d. Reference (a), Chapter 10, page 10-3, and subparagraph 10-5 (a) ~ Periodic Reports,
requires a member be provided a fitness report if member had been on board 3 months or more.
The fitness report in question covers over a six (6) month period. Reference (a) Chapter 3, page
3-4, subparagraph 3-7 (a) allows the new reporting senior to cover period and include in the next
regular report for interim reporting seniors. Reference (a) has no other stipulation on new
reporting senior’s covering periods that the:
member was not required to recel eee _ a gua
was the interim reporting senior and the report of record signed by SES-2 Gallo shows
agreement to cover the full period as the interim period was only one (1) month.
were not on board to observe the member.
his
e, The member provided and email within his petition that requests and answer to the question
of his fitness report but not a reply on a decision or an agreement. Reference (a) has no
stipulation on Pre-arranged Regular Fitness Reports only Pre-arranged Concurrent Regular
Reports. The member does not prove the report unjust.
3. We recommend the member's record remain unchanged.
eleg
By direction
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 | CY1999 | 05059-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2000. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The members requests the removal of his fitness report for the 2. The member record.
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 | CY2007 | 09600-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 27 November 2007, a copy of which is attached. The fitness report is a Periodic/Regular report. Should the member desire he may prepare a statement to the record and submit it in accordance with reference (a) and it will be accepted to the member’s official file.
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 01424-02
Your request to remove the concurrent fitness report for 27 September 2000 to 11 April 2001 was not considered, as the Navy Personnel Command record, to get the regular reporting senior’s signature on the report and his endorsement on ’ your rebuttal. member ’s statement and the reporting senior for the report ending 11 April 2001. A fitness report does not have to be consistent g. Lieuten m his previous provided several letters of support and one fro reporting 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 | CY2010 | 04025-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 5 August 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 1 June 2010, 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.