DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
& Lib te libk KRUAL. SL rut
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
4
we
ht
Docket No: NR2588-14
12 December 2014
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 you be retroactively deemed a graduate of the
Surface Warfare Officer School Department Head Class 212, and that
you be “re-screened” for promotion to lieutenant commander.
K
i]
mn
c.
Oo
=
a
ct
CE
@
Qs
* h- om " A
=
n
co
b- td
mtd oO
Oo
R
rt thereof and
s, regulations and pol s. In addition, the
he advisory opinions f shed by the Navy
Personnel Command dated 9 July and 19 August 2014 and the Commanding
Officer, Surface Warfare officers School Command (co, SWOSC) dated
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 from the CO, swosc. 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 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@ presumpliou of regularity attaches tuo 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'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
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 | CY2001 | 07506-99
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 fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior. Each fitness report represents the judgment of the reporting senior during a particular reporting period.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 11565 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 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 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 | NR2901 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. after careful ana 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09210-06
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.On 20 October 1983 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 22 after a period of prior honorable service. On...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00723-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2008. In addition, the Board considered the shed by the Navy Personnel Command dated of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the butden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10295-07
When informed of the recommendation, you waived the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 31 January 2008 with enclosures and 24 March 2008, copies of which are attached. However, the Board found enclosure (1) to the advisory opinion dated 31 January 2008 established a valid basis for your commanding officer's (CO's) loss of confidence in your ability to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3268 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on @ January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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 | CY2014 | NR6429 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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 policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1841 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on >6 June 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 15 May 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 or injustice. ...