BOARD
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 00723-08
29 July 2008
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, considered your
application on 24 July 2008.
Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewéd in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary ma
of your application, ¢
Support thereof, your
regulations and polici
advisory opinion furni
11 March 2008, a copy
After careful and cons
record, the Board foun
insufficient to establ
error or injustice.
terial considered by the Board consisted
ogether with all material submitted in
naval record and applicable statutes,
es. In addition, the Board considered the
shed by the Navy Personnel Command dated
of which is attached.
cientious consideration of the entire
qd that the evidence submitted was
ish the existence of probable material
In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Board was unable t
in stating you were de
surface warfare specia
i find the reporting senior was incorrect
inquent in qualifying as an enlisted
list. The Board was likewise unable to
find you were held accduntable for matters that were no longer
your responsibility. Finally, if you are correct that you did
not receive a service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks")
entry concerning the wilthdrawal of your recommendation for
advancement, the Board
found this would not invalidate the
recommendation against advancement reflected in the contested
fitness report. Iniview of the above, your application has been
denied. The names dnd votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon requdst.
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 in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the butden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10295-07
When informed of the recommendation, you waived the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 31 January 2008 with enclosures and 24 March 2008, copies of which are attached. However, the Board found enclosure (1) to the advisory opinion dated 31 January 2008 established a valid basis for your commanding officer's (CO's) loss of confidence in your ability to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR413 13
You requested that your discharge of 10 August 2009 be voided; that you be awarded constructive service credit from 11 August 2009 to the date you would have attained 20 years of active duty service; ‘that all *red flag” actions be removed; that you be considered by a special selection board (SSB) for advancement to pay grade E-7; and that all records reflecting the substantiation of the sexual assault allegation against you be removed. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03574-09
Finally, you impliedly requested removing the service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks") entry dated 25 July 2008 and documentation of your removal from the Fiscal Year (FY) 09 Active Duty Chief Petty Officer Selection Board List.. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00266-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2008. Regarding the report for 16 March to 24 October 2007, the Board Gid not find the "Promotable" (third best) promotion recommendation conflicting with the remainder the report, nor could the Board find the reporting senior’s second recommendation for your conversion to career counselor invalidated the report. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05470-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Chief of Naval Operations dated 5 July 2011 with attachments and the Navy Personnel Command dated 19 July 2011, 8 August 2011 and 10 August 2011 with attachment, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05123-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 July 2008, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 9 August 2008 with enclosures. 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 | CY2009 | 09891-09
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 opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 24 August and 24 September 2010, copies of which are attached, and your letter dated 11 October 2010 with enclosure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00446-10
You finally impliedly requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") counseling entry dated 25 January 2008. 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. Further, the (enclosure Board was unable to find your promotion would not have been delayed, had the results of the inspection, which was conducted on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03844-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 2008. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 April 2007 and 11 March 2008, and the advisory opinion from the HOMC Military Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM3), dated 4 September 2007, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11108-06
You also A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2008. Although the Board voted not to file the fitness report of 26 April 2005 in your record, you may submit it to future selection boards. 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.