Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10188-10
Original file (10188-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

HD:hd
Docket No. 10188-10
9 June 2011

 

ect ay

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 June 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

6 and 29 October 2010, copies of which are attached. The Board
also considered your e-mail dated 26 May 2011...

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 6 October 2010, noting you provided no statement from a
physician to the effect that your medical condition contributed
to the performance deficiencies cited in the contested fitness
report. Since the Board found no defect in your performance
record, it had no basis to recommend your consideration by a
special selection board for either the Fiscal Year 2010 or 2011
Line Lieutenant Commander Selection Board, remove either of your
failures of selection by those promotion boards, or set aside
your discharge from the Regular Navy on 31 January 2011 by
reason of your failures of selection. 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,

ant

Executive D a

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05599-10

    Original file (05599-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 28 April 2011. in finding that your FY 2011 failure of selection should stand, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions dated 15 June 2010 and 31 January and 9 February 2011, and particularly noted the statement, in the advisory opinion dated 1 October 2010, that “a discrepancy notice was not provided to MMSB [the HOMC...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05367-10

    Original file (05367-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 06266-10

    Original file (06266-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 00093-10

    Original file (00093-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing both contested fitness reports. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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 | 07246-10

    Original file (07246-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 September 2010. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06192-10

    Original file (06192-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC), dated 30 June 2010 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached. 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 | 09507-10

    Original file (09507-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except to note that the reporting senior's statement that “[your] RV [relative value] is not a reflection of [your] outstanding performance” appears in his letters of 7 April 2010 to the President of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Lieutenant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00446-10

    Original file (00446-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You finally impliedly requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") counseling entry dated 25 January 2008. 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. Further, the (enclosure Board was unable to find your promotion would not have been delayed, had the results of the inspection, which was conducted on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10794-10

    Original file (10794-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2011. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 October 2010, a copy of whichis attached. 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 | 01486-10

    Original file (01486-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 31 March 2010, a copy of which ig attached. 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.