DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
EOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
707 S$. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: NR2713-14
ze AUgqUST 2ZUL4
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of titie 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.
You requested, in effect, promotion to Chief Warrant Officer 2
(CWO2) and removal of documentation of the determination that
you were not qualified for promotion to CWO2.
You contend that in consideration of what you describe as your
stellar performance before and after the incident for which you
received nonjudicial punishment {NJP) on 22 March 1997, you have
been punished enough as a result of your NJP, Board of Inguiry
(by which you were retained), years of non-consideration for
promotion, and pain and suffering your family has endured.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 August 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, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
memorandum from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 12 August 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. In this connection, the Board noted the
determination that you were not qualified for promotion was a
purely administrative, rather than punitive action. The Board
found that determination was adequately supported by your NJP,
notwithstanding your performance record. 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,
- ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 09891-09
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 addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 24 August and 24 September 2010, copies of which are attached, and your letter dated 11 October 2010 with enclosure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05418-08
Concerning your objection that your promotion was delayed beyond 90 days after final action in your criminal case, the Board noted that the delay of your promotion was not based solely on the proceedings in state court, but also on the disposition of your case by military authorities. Even if the six-month provision of SECNAVINST 1412.9B is considered applicable to the delay in your case, the Board noted that on 12 October 2005, before your promotion had been delayed for six months,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08436-98
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. opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 5420 Ser attached. 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 | CY2010 | 13215-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. Consequently, when applying *for a correction of an official naval record, the burden ifs pn the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10071-07
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. Petitioner contacted Retired Operations Section (N-152), enclosure (2), requesting clarification on retired status. Per enclosure (4) advancement on the retired list to the grade of CWO2 would result in a loss of pay.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4643 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5694 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 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...