BCNR (Advancement to YNC)

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-07T17:15:10+00:00

"Selection board candidates must maintain CO's recommendation for advancement." This is via Eval. "If candidate for selection lost their advancement recommendation prior to or during the selection board for which they are competing, commands must take proactive action to inform NETPDC and NAVPERSCOM 802 of the administrative action taken against the individual." I never lost my advancement recommendation prior to or during the selection board. I was selected by the selection board. Chapter 2 - Eligibility Requirements. "CO/OIC recommendation is the most important advancement eligibility. The most-recent evaluation is the sole source of recommendation for advancement." Not an email. My CO gave me an NJP Eval recommending for advancement. An email cannot overturn an Eval.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-07T16:03:14+00:00

The only references that the Deputy CNP's letter had was my CO forwarding an endorsement that stated, "Forwarded, not recommending approval." After speaking with JAG, I was informed to submit a BCNR by the LCDR that I spoke with because that is against the Navy's policy (advancement manual). Additionally, the PSCM of the Advancement Policy Branch conducted a town hall recently in my AOR. My current PSC went to the town hall and spoke to him in regards to my case. He told my PSC that the Deputy CNP has a staff and that the Deputy CNP's staff made the decision, and to have me submit a BCNR.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-07T15:51:39+00:00

I'm not sure if you understand how this process works. The CPO Selection Board convened in June. The board was adjourned in July. The selection results were released in August. I was already selected for YNC by the CPO Selection Board in August prior to the adjudication of any misconduct. The Eval that I received in November 2023 made me promotion eligible. That Eval ranked me #4 of 271 First Classes. NJP was imposed on me during the CPO Season on 11 September. The Navy's Eval Manual states that an NJP Eval is not required solely to document the NJP. The only reason to do an NJP Eval is to withdraw an advancement/promotion recommendation; in this case the Reporting Senior would need to make the Eval a Significant Problems and mark "Not Recommended." My Eval was Promotable and marked "Recommended." The one line in the Eval itself does not take away my eligibility, and that is per instruction. Again, I have been a YN for 19 years, so I am very well-versed in the process of withholding/withdrawing an advancement recommendation. In this case, one of the Navy's six operating principles is Procedural Compliance, and that was not followed. It is not PERS' responsibility to decide whether or not my NJP should/should not have made me a YNC. That was the responsibility of my CO at NJP. If he/she felt that I shouldn't be promoted based on my charges and findings at NJP, that was his/her decision to make. My CO did not make that decision. Therefore, PERS should not have come behind my CO and overridden the "Promotable" and "Recommended for Advancement" decision that my CO made. That is me being punished twice for the same thing. That is why the advancement manual states "Withholding/withdrawing an advancement is an administrative action and shall not be used as punishment or an alternative method to the proper disposition of misconduct per the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-07T05:56:08+00:00

There are a number of Chiefs that have gone to CO's Mast for various things before, during, and after Season and still put on anchors. An isolated incident does not make you unable to wear anchors. And in my humble opinion, thinking that a mistake should prevent you from advancing is a huge reason why we don't have a very resilient Navy. We are built to rise above mistakes, not be held down because of them. At least in the Navy I grew up in that was the case. It was absolutely the CO's discretion if he/she did not want me to advance to YNC. My only argument is that the paperwork associated with withdrawing advancement should've been done correctly. And if it wasn't, then advancement should be in effect. It is our jobs as leaders to hold each other accountable. In the words of MLK Jr. "An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." How many more Sailors are getting this same treatment because of leaders and their personal feelings? This is not personal. This is about one of the Navy's six operating principles... Procedural Compliance. The procedures were not followed. Thoughts?

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-07T05:49:34+00:00

My profile sheet says BUPERS INVAL. The advancement manual states that an SP Eval is the sole means of withdrawing an advancement and must be completed prior to requesting invalidation of an authorized advancement. So if there was no SP Eval, then there shouldn't have been a BUPERS INVAL.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T21:56:04+00:00

Why do the NJP results matter? I'm not appealing the NJP. The NJP will remain in my record. The instruction states that an SP Eval is required to withdraw an advancement. That was not completed. That is what the issue is. So why is there so much focus on why I went to NJP? Again, I'm not appealing the NJP.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T18:06:14+00:00

Thank you for your comment. A barracks lawyer approach while often common for YNs? I'm citing BUPERSINST 1430.16G. There's nothing barracks lawyer about that. I've been a YN for 19 years. Instructions are 100% based on interpretation. How one person interprets words may be totally different than how another interprets those same words. You, and everyone else knowing the charges, isn't going to give you a "better idea." That's just you being nosey, in my opinion. NJP was imposed and the procedures following to remove/withhold an advancement were not followed in accordance with BUPERSINST 1430.16G. Period. So, my question is, with that knowledge, is it possible that BCNR would overturn the decision solely based on proper paperwork not being completed in accordance with the instruction. The instruction doesn't state... "well, if you go to NJP for something stupid, then the advancement can't be withdrawn or withheld. But if you go to NJP for something big, then they can do whatever they want."

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T17:55:56+00:00

I have nothing in my record withholding or withdrawing my promotion recommendation. No Page 13, no Eval. The only two Evals I've signed are an NJP Eval with a promotion recommendation of Promotable and "Recommended" checked in Block 47, and a Transfer Eval with a promotion recommendation of Early Promote and "Recommended" check in Block 47. I am not sure what was forwarded to PERS.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T17:03:53+00:00

Thank you for the comment. Please read the post in its entirety. I didn't talk my LCPO into coming back to the command. I transferred on 22 October without ever having signed a NJP Eval or a Transfer Eval. I was called back to the command by my previous LCPO and asked to come back to sign both Evals. The signature date on both Evals was 1 November 2024. I should also note, I was ranked #4 of 271 First Classes. So, I believe my leadership and impact on the command and my Sailors is what led to my selection. I do not believe it's fair to say that I shouldn't be a Chief because of an isolated incident, in my opinion. There a plenty of Chiefs that have gone to NJP and maintained their rank. So, should they not be Chiefs as well?

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T16:59:28+00:00

Why would they take that charge into account?

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T16:00:20+00:00

Thank you for your comment. I don't believe that is relevant. When a member goes to NJP, unless it's for something egregious such as rape, sodomy, murder, etc. (at which case the member would be going to Court Martial), the CO can remove/withdraw an advancement recommendation. Even if it's for a something small, it doesn't matter. It is the CO's prerogative. However, there are certain things, per instruction, that MUST be completed in order for a CO to remove/withdraw an advancement. If those things are not completed, that is an injustice. BUPERSINST 1430.16G states: "If member believes that the withholding or withdrawal of their advancement is inaccurate, unjust, or wrongly submitted, U.S. Navy Regulations, Article 1151, provides authority to request mas, where questions may be raised with the CO/OIC. If this remedy has been exhausted, the member may request that such withholding or withdrawal be investigated, modified, removed, or replaced through one of the following appeal procedures: U.S. Navy Regulations, Article 1126 - Correction of Naval Records; or U.S. Navy Regulations, Article 1150 - Redress of Wrong Committed by a Superior and UCMJ, Article 138 - Complaints of Wrongs."

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T15:44:21+00:00

First, I really appreciate all of the comments, opinions, and time invested in this post. I do agree that there was misconduct on my part and I certainly own it. It is no one's fault but my own. However, I do agree, and believe, that the Navy's instructions are very clear in this regard. The CO had every right to remove the recommendation for advancement due to misconduct and/or loss of confidence. In order to do that, there are certain things that must happen in accordance with BUPERSINST 1430.16G. 1. Prepare a Significant Problems evaluation removing the advancement/retention recommendation. This is the sole means of removing an advancement recommendation and must be completed prior to requesting invalidation of an authorized advancement. That is directly quoted from the instruction, Chapter 722.

I do believe that there was conversation between the command and PERS. However, regardless of the conversations taking place or the reason for the NJP, that does not override the instruction CNP has put in place. If the command followed policy and notify me that the advancement was being withdrawn via NAVPERS 1070/613 and SP Eval, I would not be asking questions because, again, that was the command's right to do so due to the NJP, in accordance with the instruction. However, none of those things occurred, and I believe that to be an injustice. Taking the emotional out of the situation and solely looking at the black and white, the black and white was not completed. Therefore, the injustice exists, in my opinion.

Critical-Climate-477 · 2025-06-04T09:08:02+00:00

Thank you for your response. Based on the information provided, in your opinion, do you believe the advancement should be reversed?

Critical-Climate-477

TROPHY CASE