DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 HD :hd
Docket No. 11845-10
11 August 2011
Dear Commander Sp
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 fitness report for
1 February to 9 June 2003. You also impliedly requested correcting
your record to show a medical waiver from the May 2003 Body
Composition Assessment, and removing your failures of selection by
the Fiscal Year 10, 11 and 12 Line Commander Selection Boards.
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. 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 14 December
2010 and 16 June 2011 and the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations
e-mail dated 17 December 2010, 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 dated 16 June 2011 in concluding
the contested fitness report should stand and the physical readiness
data for May 2003 should not be amended. Since the Board found no
defect in your fitness report record or your physical readiness data,
it had no grounds to remove any of your failures of selection to
commander. 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,
\Kraoe6
W. DEAN P
Bxecutive Mibkector
Enclosures
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 | 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 | CY1999 | 08128-97
member's petition revealed the report to be a not observed because of the member's status as a student. The report contains the required comment in Subj: L , USN, d. Further review of the member's headquarters record revealed a report for the period of 1 July 1996 to 31 January 1997. front of the document is reflected. The report on file is incomplete as only the Since the member included a e. Review of Pers-322 selection board support files revealed an advanced message was sent to the...
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 | CY2010 | 01713-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting im executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2011. The Board further neted that the waiver document you provided is dated 2 April 2006, the same date as the Body Composition Assessment (BCA) you failed in cycle 1, 2006, so the Board was unable to find the waiver was in effect when that BCA was conducted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04041-10
You requested removing the service record page 13 (NAVPERS 1070/613) entry dated 13 February 2007, and you impliedly requested correcting the Physical Readiness Information Management System (PRIMS) data for Cycle 2, 2006 to show no failure of the Physical Fitness Assessment (PFA). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2011. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03894-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2001. become effective until 1 May 2000, LCD consideration under the new program. strange, in that all officers whose promotions are delayed due to failure of physical readiness tests are retained on active duty until they pass the test or twice fail to select for promotion.
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 | 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 | 03625-10
Your request for investigation of the reporting Senior's actions was not considered, as the Board for Correction of Naval Records is not an investigative body. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2010. The Board also considered the NPC e-mail dated 3 September 2009 with attachment (DD Form 214), a copy of which is attached, and your letters dated 20 August 2009 with enclosures, 30 October 2009 and 2 February 2010.