DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD: hd
Docket No. 08604-08
15 May 2009
Dear ee
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 removing the fitness xeports for 7 December 2004
to 31 October 2005, 1 November 2005 to 31 October 2006 and 1
November 2006 to 31 October 2007; revising the report for 1
November to 28 December 2007 to remove reference to your
promotion recommendation in the immediately preceding report;
adjusting your time in service for retirement to reflect active
duty service as a Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC)
midshipman; correcting your Officer Data Card (ODC) to remove
reference to designator 1320/1325; granting you a special
selection board for the Fiscal Year 09 Line Commander Selection
Board; and filing your fitness report for 29 December 2007 to 28
July 2008.
and filing a fitness report were not considered, as you have not
exhausted your administrative remedies. You May submit these
requests to the Navy Personnel Command@ (NPC), PERS-31 for the
ODC and PERS-32 for the fitnese report.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ,
application on 14 May 2009. 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 consisited
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
22 October 2008, 18 December 2008 with enclosure and 29 April
2009, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered
your letter dated 1 April 2009.
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
dated 22 October and 18 December 2008.
Specifically regarding the contested fitness report ending
31 October 2005, the Board found the misspelied word
"causalities"” would not mislead reviewers of your record. The
Board found it unobjectionable for the reporting senior to
express his expectation as to how you would perform in the
future. Finally, the Board found no "veiled" adverse matter. |
Concerning the report ending 31 October 2006, the Board found it
an immaterial error that the reporting senior failed to include.
a comment explaining the absence of a promotion recommendation,
since he did say you had "earned my strongest possible personal
recommendation for promotion to Commander." The Board likewise
found it an immaterial error that block 39 ("Tactical
Performance") was left blank, since the applicable instruction
permitted that block to be marked "not observed," and the
reporting senior did so mark several other blocks. Finally,
while the Board did not condone the late submission of this
report, it was umable to find this invalidated it.
The Board found it unobjectionable that the report ending
28 December 2007 referred to your less favorable promotion
recommendation in the immediately preceding report from the same
reporting senior, whose removal the Board did not find
warranted,
Since the Board found no material defect in your performance
record, it had no grounds to grant you consideration by a
special selection board.
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,
SS FE
* ND jee pee!
ROBERT D,.“ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07367-06
The Board also considered your letter dated 16 January 2007.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. Subsequently, the member’s record was reviewed and he was selected for promotion to the grade of Lieutenant Commander, with this report in his record. h. If directed by the Board for Correction of Naval Records, PERS-3 11 will accept a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11528-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. The Board particularly noted that on 8 February 2007, you submitted a copy of the report ending 31 October 2006 to the FY 08 Line Commander Selection Board, convened on 13 February 2007. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05819-06
The member’s statement and the reporting senior’s 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. Concur with comments and recommendations found in reference (a)2 After examinationDD Form 149, we find no request that is actionable by PERS-480does not request that her failures of selection be removed nor does she request a special...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09809-09
You further requested that these reports, as well as the report for 31 October 2007 to 30 June 2008, be modified by adding, to section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] meets Physical Evaluation criteria in MCO [Marine Corps Order] 6100.12, and is within standards.” Finally, you requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year 2010 Active Reserve Colonel Selection Board, and granting you special selection board consideration...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017561
The applicant provides: a. b. Paragraph 3-26 (Referred evaluation reports) states that, in pertinent part, any report with negative remarks about the rated officer's Values or Leader Attributes/Skills/Action in rating official's narrative evaluations will be referred to the rated officer by the senior rater for acknowledgment and comment before being forwarded to Department of the Army. The basis for the first referred OER is the fact that he had not taken an APFT during the rated period...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10033-06
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 regard to the reporting senior changing his grading philosophy, the Board concluded it is immaterial. In the spirit and intent of reference (b), where a reporting senior evaluates a Marine’s performance, he should not assign grades to meet some preconceived fitness report average.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02370-09
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 for 1 February to 17 August 2006 (copy at Tab A) and modifying the report for 1 February 2007 to 31 January 2008 (copy at Tab B) by changing the body composition entry in block 20 ("Physical Readiness") from "NS" (not within standards) to "MW" (medically waived),...
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 | 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017269
The applicant requests removal of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Colonel (COL) Army Promotion List (APL) non-select letter from her Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), correction of the date of rank (DOR) and effective date of her promotion to the rank/grade of COL/O-6, correction of her mandatory retirement date (MRD) to 1 July 2017, and attendance at the Army War College in July 2014. g. The Army regulations provide that a special selection board (SSB) will not be convened to consider...