DEPARTMENT! OF THE NAVY
ROARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
nt &. COURTHOUSE ROAD SUITE 1001
aut COUT
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR7074-13
20 November 2014
pear Petty Off —
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 the removal of your nuclear
Navy Enlisted Classification be expunged, that the recoupment of your
selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) and special duty assignment pay
(SDAP) be stopped, and that your SRB and SDAP be repaid in full.
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
20 November 2014. your allegations of error and injustice were
reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and
procedures applicable to che proceedings of this Board. pocumentary
material considered by the Board consisted of your application,
together with all material submitted in support thereof and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations W133D dated 7 October 2014, 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 of injustice. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with 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 Gecision upon submission of new evidence within one
year from the date of the Board’s decision. New evidence is evidence
not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision
in this case. 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 burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence
of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely
ROBERT J. O’NETLL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04038-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2003. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 2000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C. 20350-2000 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 N13OD1 /03U0180 6 Mar 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDSSubj: COMMENT AND RECOMMENDAT Q IN THE CASE OFEnd: (1) BCNR case file #04038-02 with microfiche service record1. SDAP...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01272-01
opinion furnished by BUPERS memorandum of 1160 PERS 815 of 13 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. 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. The petitioner was attached on board UIC 62229. b.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03715-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08924-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2003. 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. 20350-2000IN REPLY REFER TO: 5420 N13QD/ 03U0561 8 Aug 2003MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00300-01
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. Effective dates of intitlement for Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP) are assigned by the Commander, Naval Personnel Command. 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 | CY2014 | NR8226 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2015. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by OCNO memo 7220 N130D2/14U0995 of 28 July 2014 and OCNO memo 7220 N130D2/14U01313 of 8 October 2014, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5093 14
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 opinion furnished by NPC memo 1160 Ser 813/243 dated 16 October 2014, a copy of which is attached. NR5093-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03577-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5701 13
Jn your case, the Board agreed with the advisory opinions that, because you did not gain and maintain proficiency in the community and for the NEC that you received the bonus, in the Board’s view, recoupment of the unearned portion of the bonus was appropriate. After reviewing all the circumstances in your case, in the Board’s view, the decision to recoup the unearned portion of the bonus was just, and the half separation pay you received was properly awarded according the Separation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR876 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. Because of a civil court case Secretary of the Navy was directed to reconsider his decision made in the Records (BCNR) to consider your case regarding your forced retirement per the FY09 Colonel SRB. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...