Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06215-01
Original file (06215-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

MEH:ddj
Docket No: 62 15-01
16 October 2001

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title  

Ilnited States Code, section  

IO of the  

1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 16 October 2001.
were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by  
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 5730 Pers 913 of 13 September 2001, a copy of which
is attached.

In addition, the Board considered the advisory

thie Board consisted of your

Your allegations of error and injustice

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, 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.
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.

In this regard, it is important

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

Y

5730
PERS-913
13 Sep 01

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL

RECORDS

Via:

Subj:

Ref:

Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-OOZCB)

(a) PERS OOZCB Memo
(b) PHONCON bwtn 

YNl

!JRC  Columbus GA

6110/2523  

25/REN/A002043  of 27 Jan 00

ltr 6000 PERS-913 of 3 Feb 00

10R:lll  PEB Index No. N20100537

ltr 

BUMED  

(c) 
(d) Our 
(e) PEB itr 1850 
of 31 May 01

ltr 6000 PERS-913 of 5 Jun 01

(f) Our 
(g) BUPERSINST 
(h) NRC Columbus GA  

1001.39D

ltr 7000 

NO0 of 28  

Jun 01

Encl:

(1) BCNR File 6215-01

Per reference (a),

the following comments and

1.
recommendations are submitted concerning
for corrective actions regarding his Time
retroactive drill pay/drill credit and
of qualifying service,
refund of-retroactive Serviceman's Group Life Insurance (SGLI)
premiums:

requests
IR), years

a.

BUMED  found

Per reference (b) our research indicates that YN
was injured while on Annual Training (AT) on 27 August 1
Per reference (c),  
qualified for retention due to
with no waiver
that
Reserve Center (NRC),
Voluntary Training Unit
(dj also directed NRC Columbus to
the opportunity to participate via correspondence courses for
retirement points to attain qualifying years".

Columbus GA to transfer him to the

(VTU) in a non-drill status.

recommended.

Our letter,

s not physically qualified and directed Naval

not physically
disk on 27 Jan 00,

"inform member in writing of

reference

(d), stated

Reference

Subj:

REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF

b.

In response to reference (d),
review of his case by the Physical Eva
reference (e),
the informal PEB found
qualified.
PEB.
Evaluation Board found  
active reserve service and he was authorized to return to a
drill pay status.

(e) and (f), the President, Physical

YN2wphysically  qualified for

he elected a formal hearing with the

Per references  

Subsequently,

Per
t physically

specific concerns are addressed as follows:

has requested a correction to his TIR because
eves that he lost time during the

a.
he appa
was physically disqualified.
was advanced effective  
and effective
personnel are placed in the VTU in an Authorized Absence "AA"
category.
no correction to his TIR is required.

date of advancement are not adjusted when

95JUN16  with a TIR date of  

Our research indicates

Therefore,

95JANOl.

TIR

b.

Because
(years) of serv
calculated based on his
September 01, 2001,
and 9 days total

remained on contract, his length
His LOS is
ontinued to accrue.

Entry Base Date of 25 May 88.

Pa

service of which

has completed 13 years, 3 months
9 years,   2 months and 13 days

As of

YN2

idered to be qualifying for purposes of retirement.
id not earn the required minimum 50 points per
ary year from the period August 1998 through August

These two years count towards longevity because he held

but do not count
There is no record that
as directed by reference

2000.
military status,
service.
writing,
to participate in correspondence courses to earn retirement
points towards qualifying years
second class petty officer with
should be expected to exercise reasonable initiative to ensure
an understanding of the requirements to attain qualifying years
of service.
justifies awarding him qualifying service for the period he was
physically disqualified.

we do not believe that this error

Therefore,

ars of qualifying
was counseled in
ding his opportunity

nt. However, a
level of experience

2

Subj:

C .

Reference (f) authorized YN2

but did not authorize any

(g), members in a medical hold status are

Per reference  
no.t permitted to drill.
return to a drill pay status
retroactive drill entitlements.
findings applied only to his physical condition at the time of
the hearing and did not address his physical qualification for
Naval Reserve
recommend that YN2
and credit for drills that he did not perform, be disapproved.

Accordingly, we
request for retroactive drill pay,

service prior to the hearing.

Additionally, the  

PEB's

to

d.

Per reference (b), YN2 

’

options regarding SGLI coverage while in a VTU.
(h), NRC Columbus has requested that the Defense Finance
Accounting Service (DFAS) refund the retroactive premiums. We
recommend that this issue be addressed to DFAS.

was not counseled on his
Per reference

My point of contact is PNC

3.
882-4508.

at (901) 874-4508 or DSN

Director,
Naval Reserve
Administration Division

Personnel

3



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09598-02

    Original file (09598-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, a copy of which is enclosed. Therefore we do not support his petition wit1 As indicated in reference (b), Ex-Chief Petty Officer 3. * P * Subj: REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF after his discharge, Ex-Chief Petty requested reinstatement in March, 1965.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01806-01

    Original file (01806-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2001. were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by BUPERS memorandum 5420 PERS 913 of 17 May 2001, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00123-00

    Original file (00123-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former commissioned officer in the United States Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he transferred to the Retired Reserve vice being discharged on 8 April and then to the Retired List, 2000. After a review of the chronology of service prepared Petitioner, Pers 9 noted that he earned 32 retirement points the anniversary year ending 9 September 1975 and, in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05608-06

    Original file (05608-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Navy Personnel Command dated 21 August 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05898-00

    Original file (05898-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (BUMED) that you It was the Naval In addition, the Board noted that as you did not have a remaining reserve obligation The Board noted that a determination of your fitness for duty and entitlement to disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy is under the cognizance of Disability Evaluation System (DES), rather than the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. case if the PEB had evaluated this member, she would have been found fit for continued active duty service. from active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01591-01

    Original file (01591-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 June 2001. 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. On 6 May 1998 Naval Reserve Center, Cape Girardeau requested a review of his status by the President, Physical Evaluation Board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017538

    Original file (20080017538.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military records show she enlisted in the Puerto Rico ARNG (PRARNG), in pay grade E-4, on 4 November 1998, for 8 years. The evidence of record shows that the applicant made an election to terminate SGLI coverage for her spouse in September 2003. With respect to her claim, there is no evidence in the record and the applicant did not provide any substantiating evidence that shows there is a debt for $4,500.00 or that this amount was deducted from her severance pay.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5148 14

    Original file (NR5148 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 CNRFC ltr 5420 Ser | N1/1263 dtd 22 Dec.14, a copy of which is attached. NR5148-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03742-06

    Original file (03742-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 BUt4ED letter 7220 Ser Ml/O5UMl-50l8 of 10 January 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 01725-98

    Original file (01725-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by giving him retirement point credit for his Naval Reserve participation during the period 10 August 1959 to 12 March 1962. The Board, consisting of Ms. Davies and Messrs. McCulloch and Molzahn, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 5 August 1999, and pursuant to...