DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 07018-10
14 Apral 2011
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 that your naval record be
corrected by removing two years of commissioned service (February
2000 to February 2002), or removing four years of commissioned
service (August 1995 to February 2000), or removing 14 months of
commissioned service to allow you to be considered by the Fiscal Year
13 Navy Reserve Line Captain Selection Board.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April
2011. 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 the Navy Personnel Command dated
20 August 2010 and 14 March 2011, copies of which are attached. The
Board also considered your letter dated 6 February 2011 with
enclosures and the Memorandum for the Record dated 6 April 2011, a
copy of which is also attached. Finally, the Board considered its
decision in your previous case, docket number 9826-02.
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 14 March 2011. The Board
found the basis for its action in your previous case, to remove your
failures of selection by the Fiscal Year 03 and 04 Naval Reserve Line
Commander Selection Boards, did not justify the relief you now
request. 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:décision upon submission of new and material evidence
or other mattex* not, previously considered by the Board. In this
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of
regularity attachés 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,
lo Noa
W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Di
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02196-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2001. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 May 2000, and the memorandum for the record dated 14 February 2001, copies of which are attached. Former Reference (b) requires that promotion selection essage, as was promotion boards and The Per reference (c), a lieutenant who has at least...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05662-00
The Board found that even if you had been considered by the Mobilization Disposition Board, and you had been - Inactive status as a result of approval of a board occurred until after the Fiscal Year (FY) 00 Naval Reserve Line Lieutenant Commander Selection Board had adjourned. recommendation again th is requesting removal 0 promotion to lieutenant original opinion stating that he transferred to Standby 19 May 1999 Naval Reserve Officer Mobilization Disposition Board. tha would have been a...
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 | 09248-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. 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 petitioner was promoted to commander at the 16 year point and was within the flow point guidelines.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04768-11
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 25 May and 9 June 2011, copies of which are attached. 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. 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 00822-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 October 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations dated 1 June 2009 and the Navy Personnel Command dated 17 June and 9 July 2009, 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 | CY2010 | 08895-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. 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 | CY2001 | 00803-00
Since the Board found no defect in your performance record, they had no basis to remove your failures by the FY 99 and 00 Line Lieutenant Commander Selection Boards. A review of the member’s headquarters record revealed three fitness reports for the period in question, All three fitness reports are signed by the member acknowledging the contents of each and his right to make a statement. For us to recommend relief, the petitioner has to show that either there is no rational support for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01524-01
reques:ed removal of your failure of your naval record pursuant to the A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session? opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 April attached. Enclosure (1) is returned, recommending disapproval of request to backdate his date of rank.