DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
Y
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
LCC:ddj
Docket No: 6639-02
30 October 2002
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:
Secretary of the Navy
.:
Ref:
Encl:
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) NPC memorandum 1430 Ser 81
(3) Subject ’s naval record
l/392 of 18 September 2002
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 earned Pass Not Advanced
2001 Exam.
(PNA’d) Points from the September
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, Harrison, and Pfeiffer, reviewed Petitioner
allegations of error and injustice on 29 October 2002 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.
’s
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner
of error and injustice, finds as follows:
’s allegations
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies
available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
In correspondence attached as enclosure
(2), the office having cognizance over the
b.
subject matter addressed in Petitioner ’s application has commented to the effect that the
request has merit and warrants favorable action.
CONCLUSION
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the
contents of enclosure
following corrective action.
(2), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that:
Docket No: 6639-02
a.
Petitioner earned
.5 PNA points from Cycle 172, September 2001 Exam, for credit
additiona of PNA points
toward his Final Multiple Score for the March 2002 Exam.
from the September 2001 Exam to the March 2002 Exam should make his Final Multiple
Score high enough to make him a selectee for advancement to
Center Pensacola will recompute his March 2002 FMS.
The
paygrade E-6. The Exam
b. That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner
’s naval record.
4.
Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that quorum was
present at the Board ’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete
record of the Board ’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
‘nK&L+-
6. L. ADAMS
Acting Recorder
Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of
5.
the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the
foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by
the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
30 October 2002
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06079-11
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. 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 E-6/YN1 Navy-wide advancement examinations and show that that her E-6/YN1 examinations from September 2008 through September 2010 be validated and receive PNA points to be applied to her March 2011 exam. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7570 14
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 show that he was entitled to a Performance Mark Average (PMA) score of 3.80 vice 3.73 for a Passed but Not Advanced (PNA) point of .5 for the September 2011 Navy-wide advancement exam. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, Ruskin and Midboe, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 October 2014 and,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06139-11
es Upon being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status, in late May 2010, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. * 1. Review of Petitioner's last Worksheet, (enclosure 4) for the March 2010 exam also fails to disclose any evidence that Petitioner was notified or aware of the requirement to hold a security clearance in order to participate in the advancement cycle. c. If the PNA points from the re-validated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05457-01
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 he was given credit two (2) passed not advanced (PNA) points from the March 2000 Exam. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Beckett, Pfeiffer, and Taylor, reviewed Petitioner allegations of error and injustice on 7 August 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06780-11
g. In September 2010, Petitioner again participated in the E6/AZ1 advancement exam. Apparently, neither Petitioner, her command, nor NPC were aware that she was ineligible to participate in the exam cycles. Therefore, the Board concludes that the record should be corrected to validate Petitioner’s E-6/AZ1 advancement examinations from the relevant cycles and Petitioner should be advanced from the September 2010 exam cycle.
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00712-11
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 3 October 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. g. Upon being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status in December 2010, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. He had advanced...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04795-03
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 awarded passed not advanced (PNA) points from the March 2002 E-6 Examination. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Harrison, Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 26 August 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07085-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. In September 2010, with his final adjudicated clearance, he participated in the E6/AE1 Navy-wide advancement examination and was selected and advanced with an effective date of 16 June 2011. j. Petitioner has applied to this Board seeking to have his E6/AE1 advancement exams validated retroactively for PNA points to apply toward his September 2009 advancement exam. NPC and CNO...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10262 11
The Board, consisting of Messrs. pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 25 June 2012 and, pursuant to 4ts regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be teken on the available evidence of record. 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. VOZ62-12 that Petitioner...