DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 7900-00
6 April 2001
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
(a) 10 U.S.C.1552
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject's Naval. Record
From:
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
1.
former enlisted member of the United States Navy, applied to
this Board requesting, in effect,
that his record be corrected
to show that he was released from active duty on 31 August 1995
instead of 16 August 1995.
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Swarens, Lightle, and
2.
Carlsen reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 4 April 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on
the available evidence of record.
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
Documentary material
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record
3.
pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
finds as follows:
a.
Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.
Although it appears that Petitioner's application to
the Board was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the
interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and
review the application on its merits.
C .
Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on
24 June 1993 for eight years.
on 1 September 1993 for a period of two years.
He was ordered to active duty
d.
Petitioner's reflects that he was advanced to SN (E-3)
and served without incident until 15 June 1995 when he received
a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of provoking speech and
gestures, assault, and disorderly conduct.
was a suspended reduction in rate to SA (E-2), forfeiture of
$100, and 45 days of restriction and extra duty.
Punishment imposed
e.
On 16 August 1995, Petitioner was honorably released
from active duty by reason of "Completion of Required Active
Service" and transferred to the Naval Reserve.
shows he completed one year, 11 months, and 16 days of active
service.
of accrued leave.
Upon release from active duty,
he was paid for 25 days
His DD Form 214
f.
Petitioner states that
sinceAwas released 14 days
he is ineligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
He asserts that he was guaranteed a full two years of
he
early,
benefits.
service.
Q-
Commander, Navy Personnel Command (Pers-604) advised a
staff member of the Board that individuals discharged for the
foregoing reason must complete a full 24 months of active
service in order to be eligible for DVA benefits.
CONCLUSION:
In this regard, the Board believes that had Petitioner
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
been advised that he would be ineligible for DVA benefits if he
did not complete a full 24 months of active duty, he would have
elected either to complete the additional 14 days or requested
terminal leave, since he had 25 days of accrued leave at the
time of his release from active duty.
concludes that it would be appropriate and just to show that
Petitioner was placed on terminal leave on 16 August 1995 and
was honorably released from active duty on 31 August 1995 when
he would complete two years of active service.
Accordingly, the Board
2
RECOMMENDATION:
a.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show he
was placed on terminal leave on 16 August 1995 and was honorably
released from active duty on 31 August 1995 vice the release on
16 August 1995 now of record.
b.
That the record be further corrected to show that upon
release from active duty on 31 August 1995,. he was paid for 11
days of accrued leave.
C .
That any material or entries inconsistent with or
relating to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or
completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such
entries or material be added to the record in the future.
d.
That any material directed to be removed from
Petitioner's naval record be returned to the Board together with
a copy of this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a
confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross
references being made a part of Petitioner's naval record.
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
review and deliberations,
and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Acting Recorder
Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6
5.
(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is
hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken
under the authority of reference (a),
Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
has been approved by the
72316
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05528-01
enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he was released from active duty on 3 January 1995 vice being released on 21 December 1994. Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 7 May 1992 and reported for two years of active duty on 4 January 1993. 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of 2 (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) Naval Records and having...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03476
Since the applicant sold the maximum 60 days of leave previously, he is ineligible to sell his 42 days of lost leave in conjunction with his 1 Dec 2012 retirement. Although he was paid for 60 days of accrued leave in conjunction with his 1 Jul 1995 retirement, the evidence reflects that he was recalled to active duty in Jul 2009 under the Rated Officer Recall Program and retired again on 1 Dec 2012. Therefore, in the interest of justice we recommend the applicants Extended Active Duty...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089557C070403
The Board considered the following evidence: His DD Form 214 with an ending date of 16 August 2002 shows he was paid 10.0 days of accrued leave. The evidence of record shows the applicant was paid 50.0 days of accrued during his service in the U.S. Navy.
At the completion of the course of treatment she was found fit for full duty and released from active duty back to the Air Force Reserve. No Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated at this time to determine her fitness for duty and AFRES started administrative discharge action under the provisions of AFI 36-3209. Also, in September 1996, ARPC/DPAD terminated discharge action and cleared her to return to active participating status with an assignment limitation code 7 96-0 1447 of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017064
The DA Form 4187-E, dated 13 December 1993, and DFAS Leave and Earnings Statement show the applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 prior to his separation from active duty. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to paying the applicant for 25.5 days accrued leave if the audit of his records shows he has already been paid...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022807
The applicant requests the following changes be made to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty): * Item 16 (Days Accrued Leave Paid) be applied to his net active service so he can have 24 months of active service * Item 24 (Character of Service) upgraded from under honorable conditions (general) to fully honorable * Item 25 (Separation Authority) change from chapter 13, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 to chapter 17 or 16-5, AR 635-200 2. It has now been over 17...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002065885C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, there is no evidence in the available records to show that he requested PTDY prior to his transition leave. The applicant had accrued 63 days of leave at the date of his release from active duty and used 72 days of leave as stated on his Statement of Military Leave Account, and incurred a debt of 10 days of excess leave.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007420C070208
The applicant requests (with his original application), in effect, that his 16 April 1990 discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 10 be changed to a discharge for erroneous enlistment and that all documents related to the chapter 10 discharge be expunged from his records; that he be paid for 19.5 days of accrued leave; that he be paid basic pay for the period 1 through 15 November 1988; that "something" be done about the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03610
A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommended denial, indicating that a review of the disability processing records does not show any variances from normal procedures for a member in the Air Force Disability Evaluation System (DES). Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-POCC indicated that their records show that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080141C070215
The applicant's LES for the period of 1 August through 27 August 2000 shows that the applicant was paid for .5 days of unused leave at the time of separation. His DD Form 214 indicates in block 16 that he was paid for 63.5 days of accrued leave. RECOMMENDATION : That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing on the DD Form 214 dated 27 August 2000, pertaining to the individual concerned, that he was paid for .5 days of leave instead of 63.5...