DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100
HD : hd
Docket No. 10348-10
21 January 2011
This is in reference to your counsel's letter dated 8 September 2010,
requesting reconsideration of your previous application for
correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title
10 of the United States Code, section 1552. Your most recent
previous case, docket number 04025-10, was denied on 5 August 2010.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 21 January
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 letter, together with all
material submitted in support thereof, the Board's files on your
prior cases, docket numbers 07328-08 and 04025-10, and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel
Command dated 29 October 2010, acopy of whichis attached. The Board
also considered your counsel’s letter dated 27 December 2010 with
exhibit A.
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 did not find the new
statement of August 2010 from Colonel S---, United States Army
Reserve to be persuasive. Since the Board still found insufficient
basis to remove the contested fitness report, it still had no grounds
to remove the fitness report extension of 3 June 2008 associated with
it. Inview of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief. 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,
Lo Daa
W. DEAN PFEIFFE
Executive Direc
Enclosure
aa to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04025-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 5 August 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 1 June 2010, 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 | CY2011 | 03701-11
The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 11 November 2010 and 22 April 2011 with enclosure. Since the Board still found no defect in your fitness report record, it had no basis to recommend your advancement to either pay grade E-8 or E-9,. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief.
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 | 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 | CY2011 | 00431-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 31 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your current application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior case, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07641-09
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, the Board’s file on your previous case, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03264-11
You further requested reconsideration of your previous request, docket number 12875-10, to remove the fitness report for 30 March to 6 June 2010, which was denied on 21 January 2011. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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 | CY2011 | 06696-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ’ Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 6 October 2011. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny your request for complete removal of the page 11 entry and your rebuttal. 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 | CY2011 | 05336-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove or modify the page 11 entry, and you have provided no other new and Material evidence or other matter regarding the previously contested fitness report, the Board had no grounds to remove or modify the report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...