Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05938-05
Original file (05938-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370~5 100

 HD : hd
Docket No. 05938-05
11 December 2006











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, that the fitness report for 16 September 2002 to 15 April 2003 be removed; that the enlisted performance evaluation reports for 16 April to 15 November 2003, 16 November 2003 to 24 February 2004 and 25 February to 15 November
2004 be removed; that you be advanced to pay grade E-7 effective
16 April2003; that the service record page 13 (“Administrative Remarks”) entry dated 15 April 2003 reflecting the withdrawal of your recommendation for advancement to pay grade E-7 be removed; and that your DD Form 214 (“Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty”) be amended to show your pay grade as E-7, vice E-6, and your reenlistment code as RE-i (recommended for reenlistment), vice RE-4 (not recommended)
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on7 December 2006. 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 opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 April 2006 with enclosure and 2 Nay, 24 August, and 28 September
2006, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 30 November 2006 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 opinions. 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,



W.       DEAN PFEIFFER
         Executive Di r e cto r




Enclosures




















2
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
                                                      MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
                                             5420
                                                                                                    POOJ1/059
                                                                                                    24 Apr 2006
From:    Office of Legal Counsel (Pers-OOJl)
To:      Executive Director, Board for Correction for Naval Records
Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters, Pers-31C
Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF

End:     (1) BCNR File with cover memo dtd 3 Apr 2006
 (2)      NPC (Pers-00J) memo dtd 4 May 04
1.       This responds to your request (enclosure (1)) for comments and recommendation on subject Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) petition. i s have reviewed enclosure (1) and recommend applicant’s petition be denied. The bases for this recommendation are set forth below.
2.       Applicant avers procedural and substantive defects but does not offer adequate proof of such a nature to rebut presumption of regularity in Naval personnel records and prompt correction. Applicant concedes “punitive letter of reprimand” was withdrawn when applicant’s counsel pointed out that such a letter must be the product of a court-martial or Captain’s Mast. Applicant does not articulate why this corrective action did not rectify defect.
3.       Applicant did file complaint under Article 138 that was reviewed by this office concerning reinstatement of his advancement to E-7. Enclosure (2) -
4.       Please call me at DSN 882-3163 or (901) 874—3163 if you have any questions.


Assistant Legal Counsel



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05623-06

    Original file (05623-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. This responds to your request (enclosure (1)) for comments and recommendation on subject Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) petition. Applicant has failed to furnish the Board with evidence which supports her petition.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03461-05

    Original file (03461-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2006 | 05271-06

    Original file (05271-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.DEAN PFEIFFER Executive DirectorEnclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND5720 INTEGRITY DRIVEMILLINGTON TN 38055-0000 5420P00J1/0893 28 Jul 2006From: Office of Legal Counsel (Pers-00J1) To: Executive Director, Board for Correction for Naval RecordsVia: Assistant for BCNR Matters,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04311-05

    Original file (04311-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 16 September to 12 November 2004 (copy at Tab A). By memorandum of 18 April 2005 (copy in enclosure (1)), the general court-martial authority (GCMA) concluded “the issue is moot” in light of Petitioner’s command’s message to the Navy Personnel Command (NPC),...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00018-06

    Original file (00018-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your former spouse’s naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. This responds to your request (enclosure (1)) for comments and recommendation on subject Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) petition. Applicant indicates in enclosure (I) that decedent and she married 17 October 1955, decedent retired from Navy on 11 January 1974,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07547-06

    Original file (07547-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. VOL 7BDODFMR 430101.Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMt4ENDATIONS IN CASE OF Issue : Whether law or equity dictates correction ofdecedent’s records to reflect election of former spouse SBP coverage?

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01255-06

    Original file (01255-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00HD:hd Docket No. From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U,SAY 1552 End: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 9 Feb 06 (2) PERS—676 memo dtd 17 Apr 06 w/enclosure (3) Memo for Record dtd 3 May 06 (4) Subject’s naval record 1.Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01607-07

    Original file (01607-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On April 15, 2005, Petitioner, through counsel, submitted an application to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) seeking removal of the January 1, 2001 to July 7,2Docket No. 01607-072001 fitness report, removal of naval records pertaining to the NJP and a remedial promotion board See enclosure (4)g. Petitioner’s request was bifurcated. Here, Petitioner did not take any action to have his fitness report removed until 15 April 2005, well after the dates of the Selection Boards...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09595-02

    Original file (09595-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2003. Petitioner also Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN CASE OF voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit in the District Court and his appeal in the Ninth Circuit. There is no record of error or injustice in petitioner’s navy records.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10418-07

    Original file (10418-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by changing the date of rank and effective date of his promotion to gunnery sergeant (pay grade E-7) from 1 July 1994 to 1 July 1993; and changing the date of rank and effective date of his promotion to master sergeant (pay grade E-8) from 1 April 2001 to 1 April 2000, to reflect...