DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 07834-10
7 Apeak 2011
n
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 selection for
advancement to chief petty officer be reinstated as of your original
projected effective date of advancement, 16 July 2007.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated
25 October 2010 and the NPC e-mail dated 25 March 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. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. The Board found that failure to
document the withholding of your advancement in strict accordance
with applicable directives would not invalidate it. The Board
particularly noted that in your performance evaluation report for
16 November 2006 to 15 November 2007, your commanding officer noted
you had been selected for chief petty officer, but stated you had
“experienced various medical issues” and “struggled to maintain both
%
physical and medical readiness.” 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. as
A
Sincerely,
pac
aed Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03574-09
Finally, you impliedly requested removing the service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks") entry dated 25 July 2008 and documentation of your removal from the Fiscal Year (FY) 09 Active Duty Chief Petty Officer Selection Board List.. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08967-05
In his endorsement on your appeal CSG2 analyzed the evidence concerning the charge of indecent assault and stated that he believed a preponderance of the evidence supported his finding of guilty. He conceded that the evaluation at issue was erroneously prepared and indicated that action would be taken to file a corrected evaluation but strongly recommended that your application for advancement to chief petty officer be denied. The opinion concluded by stating that given the no misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06720-07
Consequently, when applying f or a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.Sincerely,W. However, the member selection to Chief Petty Officer was removed by Chief Naval Personnel due to his security clearance being deny/revoke 31 August 2005 by the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility (DONCAF) . Reference (b), is requesting re-consideration in the finding to revoke and deny...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8212 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2014. 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 | CY2007 | 08107-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 1430 PERS812 of 9 November 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of 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 | CY2007 | 10295-07
When informed of the recommendation, you waived the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 31 January 2008 with enclosures and 24 March 2008, copies of which are attached. However, the Board found enclosure (1) to the advisory opinion dated 31 January 2008 established a valid basis for your commanding officer's (CO's) loss of confidence in your ability to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11858-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. The Board was unable to find that your circumstances prevented you from availing yourself of your opportunities to defend yourself or pursue redress regarding the contested performance evaluation reports. 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 | 04272-06
Chief Petty Officer XXXX was selected to Senior Chief Petty Officer with an effective date of 16 December 1998.b. BCNR ltr LCC:ddj Docket No: 9653-02 of 1 April 2003, directed Chief retroactive advancement to Senior Chief Petty Officer be effective since there was no advisory indicating he was not in an eligible status to be advanced on that date. RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE OF HMCM Per reference (c), Chief XXXX new Time in Rate established his first eligibility for consideration to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3163-13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that his selection to Chief Petty Officer/E-7 be reinstated effective 16 August 2011. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman and George, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 20 August 2013 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02778-00
You alleged that your spot promotion correspondence was mailed for consideration by the FY 00 First Quarter Spot Selection Board, convened on 5 November 1999. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2001. 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...