DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 10996-10
28 January 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 removing the enlisted performance evaluation report
for 16 March 2009 to 5 February 2010. You further requested
correcting your home of record and adjusting your leave balance.
The Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has administratively corrected your
home of record. Your request to adjust your leave balance was not
considered, as it may be submitted to the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
26 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 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 NPC dated
26 and 28 October 2010, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 4 January 2011 with enclosures.
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 28 October 2010. The Board
was unable to find you were asked to obey an unlawful order. In view
ae
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,
Lo un
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11272 11
g. In March 2011, after being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. He had never been held back in any way from progressing through his Navy career due to security clearance issues and he was not aware that there was a deficiency that would disqualify him from competing for advancement. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in...
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 | CY2010 | 01648-10
It is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has purged your record of all reference to your GCM. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by NPC dated 13 September 2010 with enclosure and 15 October 2010 with reference (c), 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09830-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. 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 | CY2004 | 06178-04
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNQ memorandum 7220 N130C4/04U0703 dated 30 September 2004, 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. A review of the petitioner’s Master Military Pay Account (NMPA) indicates that he had sold back 46 days of leave prior to 28 Apr 00.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 00132-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2005. 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. 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 | 13125-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 18 January 2011 with enclosure and the NPC e-mail dated 1 March 2011, 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 | CY2009 | 12754-09
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 reviewing your record, the Board noted that you previously requested Board action to entitle you to bonus (award level 3.0) for that reenlistment. In reviewing your request (to expunge the reenlistment contract of 8 June 2009 and to adjust your EAOS to 8 April 2010), the Board notes that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04044-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2011. 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. 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 | 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.