DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR GORPECTEON OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                                                WASHINGTON 0020370-5100

							HD: hd
									Docket No. 06607-05
										10 August 2007

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, on 22March2007 Contifluedconsiderationon29March2007 
its review 0f 19 August 2007. 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, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies In addition, the Board considered the advisory Opinion furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations dated 14 November 2006, the memorandum for the record dated 27 March 2007 and the fax from the Board’s staff to you dated 30 March 2007, 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. Concerning your performance evaluation report for 16 March 2004 to 15 March 2005, the Board noted theblocjc2o (“Physical Readiness”) data was irrelevant, as it reflected your most recent physical readiness test (PRT), which was conducted on2S October2004, rather than the one in question, which was conducted on4June2004. Thestatementof2sjuly2006 from a chief petty officer who says he was the physical fitness assessment coordinator at the pertinent time did not persuade the Board either, as it was submitted two years after the fact; and it did not affirmatively state you passed the PRT The Board Particular lynotedyoudidflotresp dt therequest, reflected in the fax of 30 March 2007, that you provide additional information. 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 that a presumption of regularityatt~ch~5 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,