DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 08970-08
9 April 2009
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 9 April 2003. 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
(PERS-311) dated 22 October 2008 with attachment (e-mail re
PERS-311 contact with reporting senior), 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 considered the absence of dates with the signatures of
the senior rater, reporting senior and yourself in blocks 49, 50
and 51, respectively, of the contested original report was not a
material error warranting corrective action. 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,
LoS.)
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di
Enclosure
N
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9808707
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 15 April 1999, a copy of which is attached. Therefore, at the time the fitness report was signed by the reporting senior, the reporting senior had no way of knowing that the member...
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 | CY2008 | 02955-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS ~ 311) dated 2 May 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00587-09
™ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-~- 311) dated 26 February 2009, 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 | CY2008 | 06474-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 00289-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-311) dated 2 February 2009 with attachment (e-mail regarding the 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01827-01
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. d, The fact that the fitness report for the previous reporting period from the same reporting senior is a better report has no...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06342-06
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. The member’s statement and the reporting senior 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08296-07
Additionally, the member requests the fitness reports be replaced with the correct original report. f. The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted a supplement fitness report for entry in member’s OMPF and it has been posted to member’s PSR.g. 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 | CY1999 | 00087-98
states that he signed a "Concurrent" on 14 November 1997, of "Early Promote"; however, report from his regular reporting senior, "Periodic Regular" which he received a promotion recommendation of "Progressing". comments in block 43 of the report in question, that the evaluation being submitted is based on the input from the member's TAD command. The reporting senior d. Based on our review, we feel the reporting senior assigned the member a promotion recommendation of "Progressing" due to...