DEPARTMENT OF

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

 

THE NAVY
 

NAVAL  RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC

 

20370-5100

HD:hd
Docket No: 05662-00
4 June 2001

This is in reference to your letter dated 17 August 2000, seeking reconsideration of your
previous application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10
of the United States Code, section 1552. Your previous case, docket number 7236-99, was
denied on 3 August 2000.

 

Naval Records, sitting in executive
Your allegations of error and injustice

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of
session, reconsidered your case on 3 1 May 2001.
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
’s file on your   prior
letter, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board
case, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated
17 October and 7 November 2000, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered
your letter dated 24 May 2001 with enclosures.

 

entre record, the Board found that the

 

recommendaticn, the transfer could not have

1.9 May 
traxferred to Standby Reserve 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
1999
injustice. The Board found that even if you had  been considered by the  
Mobilization Disposition Board, and you had been 
- Inactive
status as a result of approval of a board 
occurred until after the Fiscal Year (FY) 00 Naval Reserve Line Lieutenant Commander
Selection Board had adjourned. This means  you were 
  OS selection was valid in any event. The
selection board was in session, so your failure
Board further noted that as a result of review by the Mobilization Disposition Board, you
could have been discharged, rather than transferred to inactive status. Since the Board still
found insufficient basis to remove your failure by the
no grounds to set aside your discharge from the Naval Reserve on 1 April 2000.
the above, the Board again voted to deny relief. The 
panel will be furnished upon request.

FY 00 promotion board, they still had

  In view of
rlames and votes of the members of the

,?roperly in an active status while the

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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF
NAVY PERSONNEL

 
 

THE 
CClMMAND

NAVY

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

MILLINGTON TN  

380:;5-0000

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

5420
PERS-911
Ott 00
17 

Via:
Subj:

Ref:

Encl:

(PEN-OOZCB)

Assistant for BCNR Matters 
REQUE
FORME
(a) BCNR memo 5420 PERS-OOZCB of 8 Sep 00
(b) PERS-911 memo to BCNR of 10 Apr 00
(c) SECNAVINST 
(1) BCNR File No. 05662-00

AND R
USNR
I

1920.6B

returned with the

be denied. He
lection for
ebuts our

should have been screened and
Reserve-InactiTre  (USNR-S2) status by the

Per reference (a),
1 .
recommendation again th
is requesting removal 0
promotion to lieutenant
original opinion stating that he 
transferred to Standby  
19 May 1999 Naval Reserve Officer Mobilization Disposition
Board.
ineligible for consideration before the FY-00 Inactive Duty Line
Lieutenant Commander Selection Board 
would have precluded his second 
promotion.
2.
1999 Mobilization Disposition Board,

He further states that this action would have made him
held in June 1999, which

record for placement before the

failu:re of selection for

we noted the following:

In screen

.

C .

He  had failed of selection for promotion to lieutenan

If he failed of selection for promotion to

o'lr 1997 notification of our
dula to non-participation that
i:n the Naval Reserve.

a. He had not actively participated at a minimum level for
approximately five years.
b. He had replied in writing to 
intent to place him before a board 
he intended to actively participate 
commander once
commander a second time,
discharge because he was not retirement eligible.
3.
was autho

1920.6A the Mobilization Disposition Board
Placement before this board
Mobilization Disposition
if he had been placed b
including transfer t
regardi
Board no action
USNR-S2  status or separation would have been effected until the

ave precluded his separation.

transfer to USNR-S2 Status or

10 USC 14506 would require his

Per SECNAVINST 

Al so,  even

o

‘,

 

t

,....._.

i

c,r-

.

Subj

:

REQUEST
FORMER,

This means

red

The Secretary

The FY-00 Inactive Duty Lieutenant Commander

Board was approved by the Secretary of the Navy.
of the Navy approved the Mobilization Disposition Board on 26
July 1999.
Selection Board convened on 14 June 1999 and adjourned on 22
June 1999, approximately one month before the M
Disposition Board was approved.
tha
would have been a Ready Reservist and would hav
by the FY-00 Inactive Duty Line Lieutenant Commander Selection
Board even if we had placed him before the Mobilization
ti:tl been considered for
Disposit
promotio
abeyance any action
regardin
inq promotion board approval.
nd.icated  that he wanted to
Also, as
remain a
d to actively participate.
He signed a Ready Reserve agreement in August 1999 and began.
drilling in September 1999.
It is obvious that
not desire to be placed in Standby Reserve S-2
ove facts we found no compelling reaso
efore the 1999 Mobilization Disposition Board

It is important that officers on Inactive Duty actively

4.
participate in the Naval Reserve Program early in their career
Gaps in an officer's active
to be competitive for promotion.
participation that exceed four years can significantly reduce an
officer's competitiveness for promotion.
Also it will result in
the discharge of the officer before reaching retirement
eligibility if the officer has no prior enlisted service and
fails to promote to lieutenant c
for this reason that we 
contacte
to actively participate.

commander.
It is
in 1997 urging him

more favorable r
int of contact i

be given in this
ERS-91B, at

Director, Naval Reserve Personnel
Administration Division

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

N,AVY  PERSONNEL  
5720 INTEGRITY  
MILLINGTON  TN 

CCIMMAND
CIRIVE
380!55-0000

1.

Y

542 0
PERS-86

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

Subj:

Assistant for BCNR Matters 

(PE:xS-OOZCB)

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND 
LIEUTENAN

RECOM

Encl:

(1)  BCNR File 05662-00  

w/Servisce Record

We are returning enclosure (1) with the following

1 .
observations and recommendation that 'Lieutenan
petition be denied.

2.

We are in agreement with the PERS-9 advisory opinion that

ample opportunity to determine his

to take action in his best
and 
rovides no substantiation of his
Had

interest.
claims tha
Lieutenant

roperly briefed by naval personnel.
ai:Lure  of Selection been set aside and
FY-01 Naval Reserve Lieutenant Commander
selection board, his lack of participation during the previous
five years would have made him no
with his peers.
Our opinion remains that Lieutena
d the experience,
knowledge, ability and
significan
to exercise due
diligence to protect his commission, and that the current
situation is merely a result of his decisions to pursue other
interests.
accordingly, no basis for relief.

We find no injustice in this situation and

Director, Reserve Officer
Promotions, Appointments, and
Enlisted Advancement Division