DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD: hd
Docket No. 04768-11
7 October 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 that. your
record be corrected to suspend the time you lost in TNPQ
(temporarily not physically qualified) status and remove your
failures of selection, while you were in that status, by the
Fiscal Year 11 and 12 Reserve Line Captain Selection Boards.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 October 2011. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
reguiations 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 25 May
and 9 June 2011, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your counsel's letter dated 15 August 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 opinions.
The Board found the time you were in TNPQ status is properly to
be counted toward your total commissioned service, and it
*
further found that your record before the promotion boards
properly reflected your performance. In this regard, the Board
recognized that your medical condition, leukemia, impaired your
ability to receive fitness reports and career enhancing duties;
however, it did not consider it unjust that you were considered
for promotion on the basis of only those accomplishments which
were documented in your record. 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 ig 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,
oon
W. DEAN PFERF
Executive Dite r
Enclosures:
Copy to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02633-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2011. On 9 March 2007 your commanding officer recommended an administrative separation by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve due to failure to maintain medical readiness as evidenced by noncompliance with TNPQ status update requirements. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04831-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her naval record be corrected by removing her status as having twice failed of selection for promotion to commander. d. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Navy Personnel Command office having cognizance over Naval Reserve officer promotions has recommended partial relief, specifically, removal of Petitioner ’s FY 98 failure of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00685-07
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. The Board found your not having been selected for promotion to CW04 did not justify reversing its previous action. 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 | CY2009 | 12202-09
You request promotion to lieutenant commander with an effective date of 24 July 2009. AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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 | 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 | CY2006 | 09248-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. 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. The petitioner was promoted to commander at the 16 year point and was within the flow point guidelines.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04501-09
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 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 | CY2002 | 02309-00
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. equests removal of two Chief Warrant Officer FY-99 and FY-0 He was considered as a below zone candidate by the s properly considered by erve Chief Warrant Officer, He was not selected by any of 3. the FY-98, (W-4) Promotion Selection Boards. Chief Warrant Officer p?, Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9805214
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 12 and 16 April 1999, copies of which are attached. Per reference (b), lieutenant commanders in an active status who have at least twice failed of selection and have attained 20 years of actual commissioned service must be retired or separated from the Naval Reserve. Director, Naval Reserve Personnel Administration Division
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01486-10
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.