DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR9101-13
20 March 2014
Dear Commander ia
a
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 completely removing the fitness report for 30 March
to 6 August 2012 or, as a second preference, modifying the report
by removing, from block 41 (“Comments on Performance”), “detachment
for cause.”
“A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
20 March 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
24 January 2014, a copy of which is attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 4 March 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, noting that your statement to the contested report clarifies
that you were returned to service with cause, rather than the subject
of an approved detachment for cause. 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 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,
DD
ROBERT D ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
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 | NR12661 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. 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 | NR2069 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | CY2013 | NR4654-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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 | 11523-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 2 December 2009 and 30 March 2010 with attachments and the Memorandum for the Record dated 29 June 2010, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6340 13
It is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has administratively removed the contested special evaluation and reinstated your original TIR and effective dates for pay grade E-6. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 September and 16 December 2013, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04254-02
requested comments and recommendations regarding (a) guest for removal of his Detachment For Cause (DFC) Enclosure (1) is returned as a matter and that references to his DFC should be He argues that this action is His DFC was processed as outlined in reference (b) due to loss of The respondent claims that his DFC should be re-classified as an 2. A review of the member headquarters record did not reveal the fitness report in question or the member’s statement to be on tile. When the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6975 13
Your previous case, docket number 08435-10, was denied on 4 November 2010. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 08179-11
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. On two occasions, 19 September 1996, and 19 November 2007, you signed and acknowledged the Navy’s policy concerning sexual harassment. commanding officer submitted a request for detachment for cause by reason of sexual harassment, which you were allotted sufficient time to respond.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11456-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. application on 7 May 2009. 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.