DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD: hd
Docket No. 11528-09
3 April 2010
This igs 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, remedial consideration for the Fiscal
Year (FY) 08 Line Commander Selection Board and, if selected,
promotion to commander with a date of rank and effective date of
1 October 2007. You also impliedly requested removing your
failures of selection by the FY 08, 09 and 10 Line Commander
Selection Boards. Finally, you requested that the
regular/concurrent fitness reports for 15 September 2005 to 31
October 2006 and
1 November 2006 to 31 October 2007 (extended to 31 December
2007) be added to your record.
Tt is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has added to
-your record the reports in question, without the signatures of
the regular reporting senior.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 April 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinions furnished by NPC dated 8 December 2009 with enciosures,
16 December 2009 and 27 January 2010, copies of which are
attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 23 March
2010.
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. The Board particularly noted that on
8 February 2007, you submitted a copy of the report ending
31 October 2006 to the FY 08 Line Commander Selection Board,
convened on 13 February 2007. The Board was unable to find the
selection board would have given this report substantially less
weight because it was not signed by the regular reporting
senior. The Board observed that the report ending 31 October
2007 (extended to 31 December 2007) was not due when that
promotion board met. Finally, the Board also noted that you
failed of selection by the FY 10 Line Commander Selection Board,
to which you provided copies of both reports. In view of the
above, your application for relief beyond that affected by NPC
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,
Enclosures
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 | 08604-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 14 May 2009. The Board found it unobjectionable that the report ending 28 December 2007 referred to your less favorable promotion recommendation in the immediately preceding report from the same reporting senior, whose removal the Board did not find warranted, Since the Board found no material defect in your performance record, it had no grounds to grant you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09639-07
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 the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 9639-07
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 the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 12 September 2003 to 8 June 2004, a copy of which is at Tab A; removing her failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06, 07 and 08 Line Captain Selection Boards; and granting her a special selection board for the FY 06 Line Captain...
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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05367-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 June 2010 with e-mail dated 16 June 2010 and 27 and 29 September 2010, copies of which are attached. 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 | 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 | 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...