DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD : hd.
Decket No. 07641-0909
4 February 2010
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 reconsideration
ef your previous request (docket number 1647-07) to remove both
“the original and supplemental fitness reports for 1 March 2002
to 28 February 2003. The Board denied this request on 12 July
2007. You also added new requests to remove the fitness report
for 1 February to 1 August 2001 and grant you a special
selection board for the Fiscal Year 09 Staff Lieutenant
Commander Selection Board.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 February 2010. 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, the Board’s file on your previous case, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
tn addition, the Board considered its file on your. previous
case, the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel
Command dated'14, 23 and 28 October 2009, copies of which are
attached. The Board also considered your counsel's letter dated
4 January 2010.
The Board noted that the Circuit Court for Escambia County,
Florida Juvenile Division document of 24 June 2003, “Procedural
Posture of this Case," stated "The Court finds the evidence of
domestic violence on the part of [you] to be equivocal." The
Board did not consider this to amount to an exoneration of
domestic abuse, nor did it consider this invalidated the
substantiation of domestic abuse by the Family Advocacy Program
Case Review Committee. The Board substantially concurred with
the advisory opinion dated 23 October 2009 in concluding the
contested fitness report for 1 February to 1 August 2001 should
-gtand. The Board noted you may submit the reporting senior's
Letter of 20 March 2009 to future selection boards. Since the
Board found no defect in your performance record, it had no
basis to grant you 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,
oduct)”
W. DEAN PF
Executive Divectodr
Enclosures
a to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12430-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 28 January 2010 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 19 May 2010 with enclosures. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
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 | CY2010 | 06266-10
Your previous request, docket number 12841-09, again seeking to remove the original fitness report and replace it with the revised report, or just remove the original report, and remove your failures of selection to lieutenant colonel, which then included failures of selection by the FY 2005 and 2006 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, was administratively closed on 25 May 2010. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09555-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report for 25 November 2002 to 29 May 2003. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 11845-10
You requested removing the fitness report for 1 February to 9 June 2003. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2011 and completed its deliberations on 11 August 2011. 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 | CY2002 | 00899-02
The Board also considered your letter dated 4 October 2002 with enclosures. The member requests the removal of his fitness report for the 2. The fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04501-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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 material error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08232-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. The member ’s statement and reporting senior ’s endorsement to his fitness report for the period 2 February 1995 to 3 1 January 1996 is filed in his record. As there is no evidence of administrative or material error in the member's record, per ref board is not warranted.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08633-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 3 September 2009. Further, the Board noted that the modification of this report directed by PERB in your previous case was implemented on 7 August 2007, before the FY 2009 Lieutenant Colonel. 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 | CY2010 | 09308-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 16 September 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your current application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's files on your prior cases (docket numbers 07213-07 and 08633-09), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...