DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No. 08074-09
24 March 2010
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) NPC memo 1430 Ser 811/628 of 23 Sept 09
(3) MILPERSMAN 1510-030 dtd 13 Sept 06
(4) Naval Recruiting Station Lancaster memo undated
(5) DD Form 4187 (Personnel Action) dtd 26 Sept 04
(6) NAVPERS 1070/613 dtd 1 Nov 08
(7) Service Record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter
referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board
requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected
to show Petitioner was given Time In Rate (TIR) credit as an E-4 while
in the Army towards service in the Navy as an E-4,
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George,
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
9 November 2009 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the
corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available
evidence of record, Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. The Board also considered an advisory
opinion furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel attached as
enclosure (2) that recommended no relief be granted.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to
Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations
within the Department of the Navy.
b. Petitioner enlisted into the U.S. Army on 26 March 2003 and
was honorably discharged on 7 March 2008. He served 3 years, 5 months
and 12 days as an E-4, enclosure {1).
Docket No. 08074-09
c. On 28 April 2008, Petitioner enlisted in the U.S. Navy. His
enlistment contract awarded him a rank of E-3 and a guaranteed
subsequent advancement to E-4 upon completion of the Advanced
Technical Field (ATF) “A” School’. See enclosures (1), (3), and (6).
ad. Petitioner claims that his Navy recruiter promised him a TIR
credit as an E-4 for his service in the Army, (although this guarantee
was not included in his enlistment contract). In support of his
claim, Petitioner submitted a letter from the Naval Recruiting Station
Lancaster, Pennsylvania from the recruiter in charge that ‘NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08074-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. See enclosures (1), (3), and (6). Petitioner claims that his Navy recruiter promised him a TIR credit as an E-4 for his service in the Army, (although this guarantee was not included in his enlistment contract).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06253-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and Exnicios, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 7 February 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Moreover, because the March 2008 E-5 advancement exam cycle had a 100% advancement rate,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03477-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of ‘Naval Records, sitting.in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2009. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02859-10
f. In February 2010, Petitioner submitted this request to the Board for Corrections of Naval Records (BCNR) requesting to validate his February 2008 Navy-wide Reserve advancement exam and advancement to E-5/MA2, enclosure (1). * NPC stated that advancement in the MA rating required completion of MA “A” school and that Petitioner did not receive the “A” school waiver until 18 March 2009, after the February 2008 and February 2009 advancement examination cycles. Accordingly, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02523-11
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to validate her September 2010 cycle 208, Navy-wide advancement examination and show that she met the criteria to be advanced to E-5/A0Q2. Security clearance is understood to 2 Docket No. The Board determined the following: The following factors militated in favor of relief: The Board was convinced that Petitioner and the Navy were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02515-11
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to validate his September 2010 cycle 208, Navy-wide advancement examination and show that he met the criteria to be advanced to E-4/A03. The Board determined the following: The following factors militated in favor of relief: The Board was convinced that Petitioner and the Navy were unaware of any deficiencies in his clearance status...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02514-11
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to validate his September 2010 cycle 208, Navy-wide advancement examination and show that he met the criteria to be advanced to E-4/A03. Additionally, under the BUPERSINST 1430.16F (Navy Advancement Manual), members in those ratings who do not have a continuous security clearance eligibility are not authorized to compete for...
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 | CY2009 | 07108-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700 BAN Docket No. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that Petitioner was advanced to E-6/MAl from the February 2008 Navy-wide advancement exam. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner’s...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00082-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to ag Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that Petitioner was either advanced to E-4/LS3 from the March 2009 Navy-wide advancement exam or received Passed but Not Advanced (PNA) points from the March 2009 advancement exam cycle. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and Exnicios reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of...