DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX HD:hd
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 nogket No. 02546-08
8 August 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, in effect, removal of documentation of the delay
of your promotion and removal from the Fiscal Year (FY) 08 Line
Captain Promotion List; reinstatement to the promotion list;
promotion to captain, retroactively if the projected date has
passed; and, by implication, removal of your failure of
selection by the FY 09 Line Captain Selection Board.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 August 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
28 April 2008 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached. The
Board also considered your counsel's letter dated 26 June 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,
duly noting that the command climate survey conducted during the
week of 16 August 2004 concluded the overall command climate was
Satisfactory, and further noting the evidence that your duty
performance was outstanding and you were merely trying to mentor
the junior officer who was serving on a Field Naval Aviator
Evaluation Board. Finally, the Board observed that the undated
Chief of Naval Operations Action Memo specifically advised the
Secretary of the Navy that you had not been detached for cause.
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,
\S
W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dir
Enclosure
Copy to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10084-06
The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 15 December 2006 and 4 July 2007, each with enclosure. The Board considered the error, if any, in having allowed the FY 2007 Line Captain Selection Board to review your letter to the promotion board after the convening date was harmless as it was in your favor. 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 | 05149-08
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11016-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with alli material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 11 December 2008 with enclosures and 24 December 2008, copies of - which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10951-07
You also impliedly requested setting aside your discharge from the Navy Reserve on 1 February 2008 by reason of your having had at least two failures of selection to lieutenant commander.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04448-08
You requested a special Year (FY) 09 Active Line Captain A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive application on 14 August 2008. session, considered your 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09748-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application ‘on 11 March 2010. The Board was unable to find your name was removed from the report of a promotion board, under title 10, United States Code, section 618, rather than from a promotion list, under title 10, United States Code, section 629. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07125-00
The member alleges an administrative error was made on his fitness report in question concerning his promotion recommendation. c. The member and the reporting senior refer to changes to the fitness report in question as administrative changes. is returned concurr 5420 Pers 85 27 Mar 01 ings of NR The fitness report dated 14 Jul 98 2. have affected the FY-00 Active Duty Captain Line Promotion Selection Board, as it The FY-01 board would have been the first convened 14 Jan 99. to review the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03625-10
Your request for investigation of the reporting Senior's actions was not considered, as the Board for Correction of Naval Records is not an investigative body. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2010. The Board also considered the NPC e-mail dated 3 September 2009 with attachment (DD Form 214), a copy of which is attached, and your letters dated 20 August 2009 with enclosures, 30 October 2009 and 2 February 2010.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06520-08
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 31 July 2008, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 6 October 2008.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09639-07
In enclosure (6), the NPC office responsible for officer promotions has commented to the effect that since the fitness report in question is valid, Petitioner’s request for a special selection board has no merit. The documentation Petitioner provided at enclosure (3), especially the statistics, convinces the majority that Petitioner might well have deserved to be ranked above, rather than below, her peer in the contested fitness report. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by...