DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD
Docket No: NR8564-13
24 April 2014
Dear Commande: _iaaasaaaaa
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 restoration to the Fiscal Year 13 Navy Reserve Line
Commander Promotion List; promotion to commander with the date of
rank and effective date you would have received, had you not been
removed from the promotion list; and removal of all adverse
information.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
24 April 2014. 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 opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated
19 February 2014, a copy of which is attached. The Board also
considered your Counsel letter dated 16 April 2014.
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 advisory
opinion. The Board found that the adverse information in your record
did result in more than a non-punitive rehabilitative counseling
administered by a superior to a subordinate, in that it resulted in
your removal from the promotion list. 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,
7 Sante 3 Tee
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
— to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9645 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on il September 2014. Your counsel, citing DOD Instruction 1320.04, dated 3 January 2014, relied on Enclosure 4, paragraph 1.a(1)(b)2, which referred to information that “Did not result in more than a non-punitive rehabilitative counseling administered by a superior to a subordinate.” He contended that this language, which does not appear in DOD Instruction 1320.4,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4717 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Boarg (PERB) dated 17 May 2013, the e-mail from HOMC dated 18 July 2013, and the advisory opinions furnished by HOMC dated 18 February 2014 with attachment (MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, Subject: Promotion Recommendation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5198 14
You requested removing the fitness reports for 1 January to 25 June 2007, 11 July to 31 December 2009 and 19 May to 31 December 2010. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 January to 25 June 2007 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] is assigned to the Body Composition Program.” and “SECT[ion] A, Item 5a: MRO is currently assigned to the Body...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8532 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 October 2013, the e- Mail from HQMC dated 19 November 2013, and the advisory opinions from HOMC dated 25 March 2014 with enclosure and 8 May 2014, copies of which are attached, - After careful and conscientious...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11993 14
- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. The BOI found by a vote of three to zero, that you had committed misconduct, and although -the reason was supported by evidence, found that there was not sufficient evidence to recommend your separation from the Navy. The .Board found that the CO’s decision to.impose NJP was based on facts and circumstances surrounding the incident, and that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1224 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 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. 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 | 09555-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report for 25 November 2002 to 29 May 2003. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | CY2001 | 07415-00
You are requesting reinstatement in the Marine Corps, promotion You to GYSGT and retirement with 20 years of active service. The Board was aware that in 1995 the Marine Corps was being very Further, selective concerning the reenlistment of the decision whether to allow reenlistment is a matter that falls within the discretion of the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval 2 record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01135-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJG Docket No: 1135-06 19 December 2006This 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, in effect, that your naval record be corrected to show that you were not removed from the Fiscal Year 2003 or 2004 Lieutenant All Fully Qualified Officers Promotion List and that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7247 14
and by removing “Directed Comment, Sectfion] A, Item Tb: recommend that the MRO [Marine reported on] not be considered for promotion with his contemporaries.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 2014. 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...