Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11108-06
Original file (11108-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BIG
Docket No: 11108-06

-19 May 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 removing the fitness report for 1 February to
30 April 2005 signed by the reporting senior (RS) on
15 July 2005, and filing in its place the fitness report for the

same period signed by the RS on 26 April 2005. You also

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 15 May 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 opinions from the Navy Personnel Command, dated

26 March and 3 May 2007, copies of which are attached. The
Board also considered your counsel’s letter dated 1 July 2007

with enclosures.
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

dated 26 March 2007.

The Board noted that your record now includes both your
statement of 12 July 2006 to the contested fitness report and
the RS endorsement of 15 August 2007. The Board was unable to
find the evidence adduced in the investigation was unreliable or
unlawfully obtained, noting the rules of evidence applicable to
a judicial proceeding do not apply in this case. The Board did
not agree with your contention that the evidence disclosed by
the investigation exonerated you. The Board found the result of
LCDR W---*‘s Board of Inquiry did not invalidate the RS findings
reflected in the contested fitness report. The Board found your
having been given an opportunity to rebut the report at issue
afforded you adequate due process: Finally, the Board was
unable to find the contested fitness report was used as
punishment or as an illicit alternative to disciplinary 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.

Although the Board voted not to file the fitness report of
26 April 2005 in your record, you may submit it to future

selection boards.

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,

Acting Executive Director

Enclosures

Copy to:

 

At hice SNL tte tn

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10583-06

    Original file (10583-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your previous case, docket number 7199-06, was denied on 7 September 2006. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10007-08

    Original file (10007-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board was unable to find you should have been put on recruiting probation before your relief as area staff noncommissioned officer in charge (ASNCOIC) since your relief was not based entirely on failure to make recruiting mission. The Board found it was a harmless error that the reporting senior (RS) mentioned the alleged failure to make mission in section C (“Billet Accomplishments”) of the fitness report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01458-07

    Original file (01458-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:1458-079 March 2007This 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.It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 13 May to 31 October 2005 by removing section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments)A three-member...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01527-08

    Original file (01527-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 July 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 01203-08

    Original file (01203-08.pdf) 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. Although the Board voted not to remove the original report or enter the revised report in your record, you may submit the RS’s letter to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01201-08

    Original file (01201-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 02424-08

    Original file (02424-08.pdf) 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. The Board found the fitness report for 1 January to 21 May 2007 should stand, though it disagreed with the PERB position that the removal of the report for 3 November to 31 December 2006 nullified your objection to not having been counseled before your mark in section G.2 (“Decision Making...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06678-06

    Original file (06678-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O370 -5100BJGDocket No: 6678-0617 November 2005This 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 reports for 1 June 2004 to 9 May 2005 and 9 May to 30 June 2005, as well as your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.It...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07162-07

    Original file (07162-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 July 2008. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12297-08

    Original file (12297-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 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...