DEPARTMENT OF THE: NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

HD: hd
Docket No: 05949-00
4 June 2001

RET

Dear Chief Warr

This is in reference to your application for correction
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

 

ctf your naval record pursuant to the

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 3 1 May 2001.
were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Bdard. 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.
opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 14 and 24 November 2000,
copies of which are attached.

In addition, the Board considered the advisory

Your allegations of error and injustice

After careful and conscientious consideration of 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 opinions.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and

enire record, the Board found that 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

Enclosures

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
MILLINGTON TN  

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

38055-0000

Y

1920
Ser 
14 Nov 00

834D/1078

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION

OF NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

Assistant for BCNR Matters, PERS-OOZCB

Subj: FO

, USN, RET

Ref:

(a) BCNR memo 5420 Pers-OOZCB of 16  
(b) SECNAVINST 1920.619

Ott 00

Encl: (1) BCNR Case File 

#05949-00  w/Microfiche Service Record

1.

Reference (a) requested comments and recommendations

's request for restoration of his
adjustment of his retirement pay.

ereafter be referred to as "petitioner."

The petitioner has requested BCNR action based on the

2.
following injustices:

a .

During the course of the investigation he was not

notified that he was ineligible to retire in paygrade.

b.

He satisfied the requirements of his pre-trial
agreement, but was further processed for administrative
separation.

C .

There was no evidence of anything in writing that

indicates he should retire as a 

CWO3.

d.

He is willing to serve in the Navy until his statutory

service limit is reached.
3.
The action requested by the petitioner should be denied for
the following reasons, which correspond to the issues presented
in paragraph 2.

a .

Though his statement is true, he was not being processed
(b) requirement to

for administrative separation during the investigation or
judicial proceedings so there was no reference  
notify him of his ineligibility to retire in paygrade.

b .
separation

This 

.

st,atement is also true,
His pre-trial agreement

 

but does not pertain to hi
 
hfas faulty in that he wa

s

s

:

SIJ, RET

FORMER MB

Nonetheless, he was not separated based on
Following the denial of his request to

Subj 
able to fulfill his responsibilities by submitting an
unacceptable request.
his pre-trial agreement.
retire in paygrade, BUPERS (PERS-834) concurred that he had
completed all actions required by said agreement.
had not been processed for administrative separation based on his
court-martial conviction as required  
PERS-834
informed his commanding officer that administrative separation
processing was mandatory and that the only way it could be
avoided was through submission of a request for retirement in
reduced paygrade.
as properly notified that he
re a  Board of Inquiry
would be required t
to submit a retirement request rathe
for retention.

than attempt to show caus

b{ reference 

However, he

. He chos

(b).

e
e

r

C .

When his request to retire in 

paygrade was received,

grade,.and further, that time in grade waiver requests
miscondxt notwithstanding. He

PERS-82 informed the petitioner that 
at that 
are not approved in any cases,
chose to submit a request for retirement in reduced 
because he possessed a full knowledge that policy and law
precluded retirement in paygrade.

haa was ineligible to retire

paygrade only

d.

His willingness to serve is 

mc'ot.

special court-martial, and willingly submitted a request for
retirement in reduced 
administrative separation processing.

paygrade in lieu of mandatory

He was convicted at

The petitioner maintains that the government violated the

4.
terms of his pre-trial agreement and forced an action   more severe
than he intended when he
two completely separate issues
agreement were fulfilled when his original request was denied
The request for retirement in reduced 
by the requirement for a Board of Inquiry to review cases of
court-martial conviction where a dismissal is not awarded.

.
paygrade was necessitated

encored into the agreement

The terms of the pre-tria

These ar
l

e

 

.

.

5 .

PERS-834 Point of Contact i

s

Head, Officer Performance Branch

2

!

,j

.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
ITY 
INTEGR
DF !l VE
M ILL INGTON TN
 

5720 

3805 !i- 0000

Y

1811
PERS-822
24 Nov 00

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

NAVAL RECORDS

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

Via:

Assistant for  BCNR Matters,

PE;RS-OOZCB

Subj:

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION

Ref:

(a)  BUPERS memo 5420

 

PERS-OOZCB  of 17 Nov 00

Encl:

(1) BCNR file

Reference (a) request comments 

1.
subject officer's case.
Specificall\,,
time in grade (TIG) waiver to retire a
effective 1 September 2000.

and recommendation in

to retire as a 

CWO(
In May 2000,

another voluntary 
grade (NLG) waiver.
Assistant Secretary of the Navy
on 5 June 2000.

retireme

equested voluntary retirement

h was
ubmitted
or a next lower

was approved by the

(ManpOWer  and Reserve Affairs)

Due to the fact that SECNAV 

3.
(MR&A) approved
retirement request in the next lower grade, and
waivers have been approved in over 2 years, we recommend CW03

retired grade and pay remain as CW03.

4.

Enclosure (1) is returned.

Assistant Branch Head,
Officer Retirements