Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00292-07
Original file (00292-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
£3OAR[) FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5’QQ



HD:hd
Docket No. 00292-07
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. You requested that your lieutenant commander date of rank and effective date be adjusted to reflect selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06 Aerospace Engineering Duty Officer Lieutenant Commander Selection Board, vice FY 07.

A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 there of Your naval record applicable statutes regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 14 February 2007 with enclosure, a copy of which is 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. Accordingly, 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 the r matter not previously co n sidered b y In this regard, it is important to keeping mind that to all official records. Consequently when applying for a correction of an off icial nava l record, the burden is on the applicant to the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Enclosure
Sincerely,






DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITy DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 380550000

5420
PERS—480/0107
14 Feb 07


MEMORANDUM FOR   EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-310)

Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF



End:     (1) BCNR File 00292-07
(2)      NAVADMIN 002/05

1. Enclosure (1) is returned recommending request to receive a date of rank adjustment be disapproved.


2. selection for redesignation is listed in enclosure (2). However, paragraph 3 of enclosure (2), states “the message is not authority to deliver change of designator letter to the selectee.” official redesignation was effective on 28 July 2005.



3. Since the Selection Board convened in April 2005, prior to
official redesignation taking place, her request for a date of rank adjustment should be denied





                                                     
Direct Officer Career Progression Branch

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04288-06

    Original file (04288-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the alternative, you requested that your captain date of rank and effective date be adjusted from 1 September 1990 to 1 December 1989, to reflect selection by the FY 1990 Captain Selection Board, vice the FY 1991 Captain Selection Board, as your redesignation as an unrestricted officer came too late for you to be considered in the promotion zone by the earlier promotion board. Applicant was selected for redesignation for unrestricted officer as announced in reference (c) . The FY91 USMC...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09248-06

    Original file (09248-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 05756-02

    Original file (05756-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Chapman, Kim and Pfeiffer, reviewed Petitioner allegations of error and injustice on 3 October 2002, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. 2001 (copy in enclosure (1) at Tab A), she was advised of her message of 28 December selection for appointment to the CEC by the November 2001 Transfer/Redesignation Selection Board. They recommended changing her date of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10951-07

    Original file (10951-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also impliedly requested setting aside your discharge from the Navy Reserve on 1 February 2008 by reason of your having had at least two failures of selection to lieutenant commander.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00685-07

    Original file (00685-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 03898-08

    Original file (03898-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On that particular board there were 10 eligible for promotion and only 8 were promotedig a mem shows that he communicated with the President of the FY "Board when he was below zone and enclosed a letter from CCE/MCU that stated he had completed the Warfighting PME and was thus PME complete. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03368-07

    Original file (03368-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 the lineal position, date of rank, and effective date in the grade of lieutenant commander he would have been assigned had he been selected for promotion to that grade by the Fiscal Year (FY) 05 Staff Lieutenant Commander Selection Board, which he missed, vice the FY 07 Staff Lieutenant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10584-07

    Original file (10584-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. In this connection, the Board particularly noted that you were not selected when you received remedial consideration for promotion from the FY 2005 and 2006 Master Sergeant Selection Boards; and the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion dated 29 April 2008, except to note you actually had only one observed gunnery sergeant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09138-06

    Original file (09138-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bowen, Exnicios and Schultz, reviewed Petitioner’ s allegations of error and injustice on 14 December 2006, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. They specifically recommended that his lieutenant commander date of rank (and by implication, effective date) be adjusted to 1 October 2005.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06720-07

    Original file (06720-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Consequently, when applying f or a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.Sincerely,W. However, the member selection to Chief Petty Officer was removed by Chief Naval Personnel due to his security clearance being deny/revoke 31 August 2005 by the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility (DONCAF) . Reference (b), is requesting re-consideration in the finding to revoke and deny...