Last saved by: terry.bynum

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

			MEH
										Docket No. 5606-07 
										28 Aug 07

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2007. 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 advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PERS-352G of 27 Jul 07, a copy of which is attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of 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 comments contained in the advisory opinion. 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 and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is also 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,

W.	DEAN PFEIFFER ~ Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
	 5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
	MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
	1780
PERS—352G
27 Jul 07

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Via:	Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-3lC)

Subj:	REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
	
	Ref:	(a)	CNPC memo 5420 PERS—31C of 26 Jul 07
		(b)	Title 38, United States Code, Chapter 32
		(c)	Veterans Improvement Act of 1996 (PL 104—275)
		(d)	Veterans Benefits and Health Care Improvement Act of
			2000 (PL 106—419)

1.	The following is provided in response to reference (a)

a.	Per reference (b), the Veterans Educational Assistant the Program (VEAP) was available to members who entered the military for the first time between 1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985. It was closed to new enrollments on 30 June 1985, but reopened for five months from m 28 October 1986 to 31 March 1987. Notification of the open period and final closure of VEAP was given widest dissemination.

b.	DD Form 2057 was used to document a member’s decision whether or not to voluntarily participate in VEAP  rated there was such a form in his service record and he, like man other Sailors, chose not participate with the understanding he could enroll in the program any time while on active duty did not provide a copy as supporting documentation; however, a Department of Defense form with a publication date of 1976, containing this option does not override a later act of Congress that closed VEAP. Only those members who elected to enroll in VEAP and had their did, bursting office start an allotment to a VEAP account are considered participants A review of record indicates he initially entered active duty on 7 February 1984 ____ records further indicate he did not participate in VEAP before 1 July 1985, or by the end of the VEAP open period, 31 March 1987.

c.	Reference (c) offered MGIB Program enrollment to active duty VEAP participants with money in their VEAP account on 9 October 1996 (date of enactment). Per reference (d), an individual who was a VEAP participant on or before 9 October 1996 and served continuous~1y from that date through at least 1 April 2000 was allowed an opportunity to

For Official Use Only - Privacy Sensitive: Any misuse or unauthorized disclosure may result in both civil and criminal penalties
Subj:	REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ICO

convert from VEAP to the MGIB Program.	_____ seems to believe “all” personnel were included, not just VEAP “participants.” Unfortunately, no provisions were made in references (c) or (d) for
members like	who did not participate in VEAP.

d. We recommend denial of	request to become a VEAP participant now with conversion to the MGIB Program. He did not participate in VEAP before 1 July 1985, or by the end of the VEAP open period, 31 March 1987. Additionally, since  was not a VEAP participant, he was not eligible for conversion to the MGIB Program. VEAP was never a very popular program, and it is only now when members/veterans are retiring or considering further education that they are requesting enrollment in VEAP with conversion to the more beneficial MGIB Program. Although we believe all who have served on active duty deserve quality education benefits, allowing those who didn’t participate in VEAP before the legislated deadlines to enroll now, with or without subsequent enrollment in the MGIB Program, would create an inequity to the thousands of other Sailors who also didn’t participate and now have no education benefits.

2.	PERS—352G’s point of contact is Ms. who can be reached at (DSN)	882-4259 or (C)	901-874-4259.

Head, CI Bill Programs Section
(PERS—352G)

2