DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR804-13
24 October 2013
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 all reference to Hotline Complaint
HO0L76413129 (20010503) be removed from your permanent record; that
official documentation disproving the findings of the Hotline
Complaint be filed in your permanent record; and that at the earliest
opportunity, your updated permanent record be placed before a
selection board for promotion to pay grade O-7.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
24 October 2013. 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 thereof and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinions from the Office of the Judge
Advocate General (Administrative Law) dated 3 June 2013 and the Navy
Personnel Command dated 29 and 30 July 2013, copies of which are
attached. The Board also considered your e-mail dated 30 September
2013 with attachment.
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 opinions dated 3 June and 29 July 2013.
The Board noted that the quotations, in the attachment to your e-mail
of 30 September 2013, from enclosure (5) to your application (the
legal review of the Military Whistleblower Reprisal Investigation)
appear in paragraph 3.a, which pertains to the November/December 1999
communication to NCWG2 personnel regarding potential problems with
the EZ PASS account and missing supplies; and the Board further noted
that this same paragraph also states that you “readily admit
knowledge of other protected communications.” In view of the above,
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 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 burden
is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
\s Wes
WT. DEAN RFETFE
Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06799-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 22 October 2009. The Board found it sufficient that you were afforded a chance to respond to the Hotline Completion Report of 2 April 2008 before you were removed from the promotion list. 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 | CY2008 | 08049-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS - 311) dated 30 September 2008, with e-mail regarding PERS-311 contact with the reporting senior, 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 member’s statement and the reporting senior’s endorsement to the fitness report are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Fri Sep 22 14_00_29 CDT 2000
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. considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 May 1999, and a memorandum for the record dated 28 June and 7 July 1999, copies of which are attached. A review of the member’s digitized record revealed the The member signed the report report in question to be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09600-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 27 November 2007, a copy of which is attached. The fitness report is a Periodic/Regular report. Should the member desire he may prepare a statement to the record and submit it in accordance with reference (a) and it will be accepted to the member’s official file.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07272-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, reguiations and policies. The Board found that your FY 2012 failure of selection should stand as well, since it found insufficient basis to modify your fitness report record;...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01562-03
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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the 2.c, that the applicant “has to show that advisory opinion, except the statement, in paragraph either there is no rational support for the reporting senior’s action or that the reporting senior acted for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4746 14
A three-member panel of ‘the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. Documentary 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 report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board dated 2 April 2014, the e-mail from HQMC dated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2373 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board also considered your letter dated 5 July 2013. 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 | CY2005 | 07493-05
5420 Ser 00J3/097 12 Dec 05MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Via: Assistant for BCNR Matters, PERS-3LC2 Subj: REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION ICO CDR Reference (a) requested this office provide comments on Petitioner’s request to remove service record documents related to a “matter of interest” holding stemming from a Commander Pacific Fleet hothine complaint report of investigation. On the contrary, reference (b) gives Commander, Navy Personnel...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11211-07
The Board also considered your fax letter dated 20 February 2008.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.Specifically regarding the contested fitness report for 16 September 2005 to 14 August 2006, the Board agreed with you that the reporting senior failed to provide the required narrative justification for the adverse marks assigned. ...