DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 9059-18 
Ref: Signature date 

Dear

This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 2020.  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, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, as well as the 5 November 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by Navy Personnel Command (PERS-80), and your response thereto. 

The Board carefully considered your request for a Reserve Judge Advocate General Corps (JAGC) Captain Special Selection Board (SSB).  The Board considered your contention that you recently found several defects in your record that you believe may have resulted in an incomplete presentation of your record to the JAGC Captain Selection Board.  You also contend that you earned reserve points that that were not credited to you, that you received early and high recommendations for promotion to Captain, and that you were assigned as the Defense Counsel for a high profile general court-martial at Submarine Base .  You assert that specific errors in your record include: missing fitness reports over a three year period after 30 September 1988 and correspondence courses from the Naval War College. 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that your request is well outside the three-year limit and has not meet the reasonable diligence standard.  In this regard, the Board noted that you were transferred to the Navy Retired Reserve on 3 February 1992.  In accordance with paragraph 1.c (3) of Special Selection Boards, Supplemental All-Fully-Qualified Officers List and Special Boards Instruction (SECNAVINST 1402.1), “All applications for SSBs must be received no later than three years after the date the contested board results were made public.  Applications received more than three years after the date the contested board results were made public will be treated as untimely and shall be denied…”  TheBoard also noted that the discrepancies in your record were identified by you in connection with a recent writing project.  In accordance with paragraph 1.c(2) of SECNAVINST 1402.1, “An SSB will not be convened to consider any officer who, by maintaining reasonably careful records, might have discovered and taken steps to correct the error or omission in the official record prior to the convening of the Promotion Selection Board that considered but did not select the officer.” The Board found no evidence that you exercised due diligence to review and correct your record prior to the convening of the Promotion Selection Board or that you requested a SSB within three years after the date the contested board results were made public.  Concerning you contention that you received early and high recommendations for promotion and were assigned as the Defense Counsel for a high profile general court-martial at Submarine Base London, the Board found no evidence that your record was not properly presented for consideration during your JAGC Promotion Selection Board.  Concerning your contention that you did not receive earned reserve points, the Board found no evidence to support your contention, and you provided none.  The Board thus concluded that there is no probable material error or injustice warranting corrective action. 

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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,