DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY -
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Re, , pee py! a bpm ee Ot Lees ot Ae
Pie & OOUPTHOUSE RO SUITE 104
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No:NRO3502-13
26 August 2013
From: .Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO Cs
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C, 1552
Enci: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Navy Personnel Command (NPC} memo 1430 Ser 811/212
of 25 Jul 2013
1. . Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner, filed
enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the .
applicable naval record be corrected that he receive two Pass but Not
Advanced (PNA) points from the September 2011 Navy-wide advancement
examination that he missed through no fault of his own and that. he be
advanced to E-5/AT2.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Zsalman, Exnicios, and George
reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on
13 August 2013, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the
partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentery material considered by the
Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies.
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. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the office having
cognizance over the subject matter addressed in Petitioner’s application
has commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request warrants partial
relief as described below.
CONCLUSION
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the
existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective
action.
Docket No.NR03502-13
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner's naval recotd be corrected, where appropriate, as
follows:
a. Petitioner has received 1.5 PNA points for the E- 5/AT2
September 2011 Navy-wide advancement examination.
b. That so much of Petitioner's request for corrective action as
exceeds the foregoing be denied.
c. A copy of this Report of Proceedings will 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 ths Board’s proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
| urna!
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRONTE I. MONTGOMERY
Recorder Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e)
of the revised Procedures of 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.
26 August 2013 RL SE, Ae
Fen. W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2970 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 her Performance Mark Average (PMA) for the September 2011 Navy-wide advancement exam cycle 212 should have been 3.8 vice 3.7. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Zsalman, Ruskin and Exnicios reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 21 July 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that...
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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR6791 14
gsalman, Exnicios and Ruskin reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 21 July 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosures (2) and {3}, the Docket No.NR6791-14 Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 22...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09121-08
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 Petitioner was awarded passed but not advanced (PNA) points for the September 2007 Navy-wide advancement exam. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 6 January 2009 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10656 11
Under BUPERINST 1430.16F, (Advancement Manual for Enlisted Personnel of the U.S. Navy and U.S. Navy Reserve), all personnel designated in certain ratings, including Petitioner’s rating, “must maintain, as a minimum, continuous security clearance eligibility.” This provision has been interpreted by NPC to mean that, in order to be eligible to participate in an advancement cycle, take an advancement exam or advance to the next highest grade, a Sailor in one of the designated ratings must hold...