DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
EGA
Docket No: 12661-14
31 March 2015
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552. .
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 March 2015. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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, your naval record, and
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. :
You reenlisted in the Navy on 11 July 2002 and were subsequently
commissioned as an officer on 23 July 2004. You served without
disciplinary incident until 26 February 2014, when you were
detached for cause (DFC) due to substandard performance of duty.
Nonetheless, you have completed your service obligations without
additional disciplinary incidents, and as such your performance
has been recognized by your chain of command.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your satisfactory service, desire to remove the DFC, and
allegations of being wrongfully detached for cause.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case because no error or
injustice was identified during the administration of your DFC,
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
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.
$ . 1
Sincerely,
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01159-05
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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You were commissioned in the Naval Reserve on 3 February 1988 and began an uninterrupted period 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 | CY1998 | 07309-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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. Since you have been treated no differently than others who have been similarly detached, the Board finds no basis for removing the NJP...
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 | CY2002 | 01679-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2002. The Board was likewise unable to find that the Commander, Naval Surface Reserve Force denied your right to an interview with him; that he inadequately reviewed the DFC documentation; or that he wrongfully concurred with and forwarded the DFC recommendation. Since the Board found that the DFC and related fitness report should stand, they had no...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08475-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2011. 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to change...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08895-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1096 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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...
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 | CY2009 | 01048-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2009. If the DFC is approved, the date of AQD removal is that of the original suspension, As a result of the DFC approval, <0 nuclear AQDs were removed effective the date. This action was concurred in by the Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program’s (CNO NOON).