Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08507-01
Original file (08507-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT  OF THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y   A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

HD:hd 
Docket  No:  08507-0 1 
18 June 2002 

Dear  CO- 

This is  i n   reference  to  your  application  for correction of  your  naval. record  pursuant to  the 
provisions of  title  10 of  the  United  States Code,  section  1552. 

A  three-member  panel  of  the  Board  for  Correction  of  Naval  Records,  sitting in  executive 
session, considered  your  application  on  13 June 2002.  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  the  Navy  Personnel Command dated  15  February 2002, 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 existence of  probable material error or 
injustice.  The Board  does not grant the naval  flight officer (NFO) designator to  an  officer 
who  has  never  held  it,  as they consider  this a  matter  for cognizant naval  authorities. 
However,  they  substantially concurred  with  the advisory opinion in  concluding that  your 
request  for  NFO  wings  should be  disapproved.  In  view  of  the above,  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 
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 bi~rden is on  the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence of  probable  material error or  injustice. 

Sincerely, 

W.  DEAN  PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 

Enclosure 

DEPARTMENT O F  THE NAVY 

N A V Y  PERSONNEL C O M M A N D  

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE 

MILLINGTON T N  38055-0000 

5420 
PERS-911 
15 Feb 02 

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR ClORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Via: 

Assistant for BCNR Matters  (PERS-OOZCH) 

Subj : 

Ref: 

(a) BCNR memo 5420 PERS-OOZCB of  16 Jan 02 
(b) MILPERSMAN 1210-010 

Encl:  (1) BCNR file 

1.  Per reference (a) ,  enclosure  (1) is returned with the 
recommendation that- 
Flight Officer  (NFO) wings be denied.  The following comments are 
provided in support of our recommendation. 

request for issuance of Naval 

. .  . 

2 . m n t e r e d  the Naval service in 1983.  He attended 
VT-10 until June 1984 during which time he was ranked 25 among 26 
students, and was subsequently assigned to VT 86.  His report of 
fitness from VT-86 dated 4 October 1984 indicated that he 
attrited from Advanced Navigation Officer Tra~~ning before 
progressing to the evaluation stage of his academics and flight 
training.  He then received orders to Lowry Air Force Base where 
he completed Intelligence Officer training in June 1985.  After a 
three-year fleet assignment as an Intelligence officer, he 
separated from active duty and became an active participant  in 
the Naval Reserve program.  He was promoted to the rank of 
Commander in November 2000 and has completed more than 18 years 
of qualifying service towards retirement.  After continuously 
serving in Selected Reserve  (drill pay) billets until October 
2001, he was assigned recently to a non-pay VTU unit where he 
continues his career as a Naval Reserve officer. 

3 .   Per reference (b), only the Chief of Naval Air Training 
(CNATRA) issues NFO designation authorizing the wearing of wings. 
PERS-911 is the point of contadt for reserve officer designator 
changes and verification of warfare qualifications.  Our 
responsibilities include reviewing an official record to 

determine whether the member has completed requirements and 
documenting such in appropriate electronic files.  From the 
information contained in 
readily apparent that h
attached to VT-86.  Official documentation via his fitness report 
from V T - 8 6   substantiates this fact. 

 NFO qualifications while 

official record, it is 

i

e

m

a

n

is based primarily on his personal 

4 .   ,-request 
recollections of events that took place many years ago.  His 
flight logs and training jacket do not provide sufficient 
justification to support his request.  He has not provided and 
our research has not found any documentary evidence that either 
an error or injustice occurred in this case.  Therefore, we 
recommend disapproval of his request for authorization to wear 
the wings of a Naval Flight Officer. 

5.  My point of 

t DSN 

Director, Naval Reserve Personnel 
Administration Division 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 05214-98

    Original file (05214-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 12 and 16 April 1999, copies of which are attached. Until 1 September 1995, as a member of the Ready Reserve, and as such, W= be considered by promotion - - selection boards. A complete review of Lieutenant Commander record reveals that there were no properly considered during either failure of selection per reference (c).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00359-99

    Original file (00359-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 4 May 1999 with enclosure, a copy of which is attached. requested continuation in an active status in 2. captai- order to be considered by the FY-00 Naval Reserve 0-7 Line Promotion Board which convened on 8 February 1999. NPC-911 is responsible for Naval Reserve Continuation Boards.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02243-01

    Original file (02243-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ~ l l members of the Ready Reserve (including the Individual Ready Reserve) are required by law to be considered by promotion boards, whether or not they are actively participating. Per Title 10, U.S. Code, Chapter 1407, a lieutenant commander who has at least twice failed of selection and has completed 20 years of commissioned service must transfer to the Retired Reserve, if eligible, or be discharged. 0 was notified, per reference (c) , that he had become subject to the attrition...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Jan 31 11_19_45 CST 2001

    i DSN Copy to: 21, 40) By direction o 703 614 9857.~2/ 2 .,~ 1920 PERS-911 ~7 JUN )999 SENT BY : IJSAED-CELMS-ED 7- 7-93 ;10:45AM COftS OF ENGINEERS— DEPARTMENT OF TH1 NAVY NAVY PISIONNIL COMMAND 17*0 ENTIOIITY DRIVI MILUNCTON TN 31055-0000 Comrnanc Personnel C From: To: Via: Subj: YOUR STATUS IN THE NAVAL RESERVE Ref: (a) SECNAVINST 1920.6A (b) COMNAVRESFORINST 1740.1 Per reference (a), an officer in the permanent grade of 1. lieutenant who has twice failed of selection for promotion to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09826-02

    Original file (09826-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    c. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), PERS-80, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) office having cognizance over active and reserve officer career progression matters, has recommended that Petitioner's request to remove his failure of selection by the FY 03 Naval Reserve Line Commander Selection Board be disapproved. e. In correspondence attached as enclosure (4), Pers-911, the NPC office having cognizance over Naval Reserve personnel administration, has commented to the effect...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05662-00

    Original file (05662-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. tha would have been a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05889-01

    Original file (05889-01.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 opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 19 November 2001 arid 11 February 2002, copies of which are attached. The member requests his fitness reports for the periods 26 May 1999 to 3 1 October 1999 and 1 November 1999 to 3 1...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08509-00

    Original file (08509-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Chapman, Shy and Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 April 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. They say the only action required of Petitioner to return to active duty or the Ready Reserve, if this correction is approved, is to request a Naval Reserve commission and submit a Ready Reserve service agreement to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08560-01

    Original file (08560-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting i n executive session, considered your application on 13 June 2002. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, theburden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The projection for her next in zone eligibility for captain puts her at the 23 year mark, which is also one year above the notional flow point and in accordance with SECNAVINST...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00529-02

    Original file (00529-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he resigned and was discharged from the Naval Reserve on 20 November 1994. b. We recommend approval of his request for resignation from the Naval Reserve, with an effective discharge date of 20 November 1994 November 1994, be expunged from his Naval records, including any failures of selection, transfers, and accumulation of years of commissioned service. Because - oneously affiliated in the Selected Reserve November 1994 not be...