DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV
Y
BOAR,,
FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No:
4 October 2002
6736-01
This is in 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 1 October 2002.
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.
Your allegations of error and
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.
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on
24 August 1988 at age 24.
In connection with your enlistment in
the DEP, you were honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve
(USAFR) on 23 October 1988.
This action was required because the
law prohibits an individual from being in two military components
at the same time.
enlistment contract was your agreement to enlist in the Regular
Navy on 9 March 1999.
administratively separated from the Naval Reserve on 9 March
1989.
Entered on the front page of the DEP
Since you did not enlist, you were
You contend in your application, in effect, that it was improper
to enlist you in the DEP because you were a member of the Air
Force Reserve and the DEP program is for new enlistees.
a Department of Defense Instruction that states that when there
is an interservice transfer there should be no break in service.
Since time in the DEP does not count for longevity purposes, you
believe that there has been a break in your service.
You also
contend that the Navy did not issue you orders to report to
active duty and the administrative separation for failing to
report for active duty was erroneous.
You cite
Of
YOU previously applied to the Air Force Board for Correction
Military Records (AFBCMR) contending that you were improperly
discharged from the USAFR and requested credit for several years
of paid drills.
The AFBCMR stated, in part, as follows:
A review of the evidence reveals that the applicant
voluntarily switched military services, ultimately
enlisting in the United States Navy Delayed Enlistment
Program.
However, for some unknown reason, he failed
to report for active duty after several attempts were
made to contact him regarding his active duty
He alleges that he never received
commencement date.
However, we
notice from the Navy to report to duty.
note that the notices were delivered to the address he
acknowledges that he provided to the Navy recruiter.
Notwithstanding this, we believe that the applicant had
a responsibility to seek to determine his status with
the Navy.
Other than his own assertion, no evidence
has been presented that he did so.
The AFBCMR concluded that your discharge from the USAFR was
proper.
When you did not enlist as you agreed,
The record shows that you voluntarily enlisted in
It is clear from the regulations that your discharge from
the USAFR was required when you enlisted in the Naval
Reserve.
the DEP and agreed to enlist in the Regular Navy on or
before 9 March 1989.
the only option left to the Navy was to separate you from
the Naval Reserve.
The Board noted the comments made by
AFBCMR to the effect that the Navy attempted to resolve your
status by sending information concerning your active duty to
the address you provided.
Further, the Board believed that
since the date you were supposed to enlist in the Navy was
entered on the enlistment contract, you should have
contacted the recruiter prior to that date.
The Board
believed that that any problems concerning your military
service were essentially of your own making when you did not
comply with the terms of your contract.
that the actions taken in your case were proper and a change
in your record is not warranted.
The Board concluded
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
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
2
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
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02665
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is an Exhibit A. An AF Form 1613, Statement of Service, was prepared by the Air Force on 28 October 1981, showing the applicant’s USNR enlistment date of 30 June 1980, USNR discharged on 16 June 1981, and his enlistment in the USAF on 24 September 1981. Attachment B shows his enlistment in the USNR on 30 June 1980.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02439
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02439 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to reflect “Officer’s Resignation from all appointments in the USAF” to “Resigning regular officer accepting a commission as a reserve of the Air Force”...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06007-03
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by PERS memorandum 1780 PERS-604 of 15 July 2003, a copy of which is attached. record requires no correction since he was Program benefits. A t this time, it's a moot point since MIA cannot make payments under the VEOIB Program for training pursued after 31 D e 1989. c e d. Per referenae (d), VEQIB Program eligibles meeting either of the following requirements are automatically converted the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014526
The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: * DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service), dated 7 August 2009 * Release from active duty (REFRAD) and Retirement Orders * DD Form 214 dated 31 August 2003 * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) dated 17 February 1987 * DD Form 214 dated 3 December 1986 * United States Air Force (USAF) Enlistment/Active Duty Orders dated 15 March 1983 * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03439
A member’s Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) is established from their Total Federal Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD) in accordance with Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 14507, which requires that a Line-of- the Air Force colonel, not selected for promotion to the grade of brigadier general, be separated not later than the first day of the month following completion of 30-years commissioned service. Although applicant contends he had a break in service from November 1982 to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00612
DPTS states that due to a delay in processing the 20 August 2012, scroll at the SecDef level the applicant incurred a break in service between his date of separation and his appointment date into the Air Force Reserve. Therefore, they recommend approval of the applicants request to reflect no break in service and corrections to service dates and ARPC IMT 92. The complete ARPC/DPTS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Neither her Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship Program (AFHPSP) contract nor the AFI states that her Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) ADSC could not be served during an active duty military residency. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that it was evident no review of the FY93 0-6 board results took place and the party line of, “the Board uses the whole person concept to make selections” was the basis and mainstay for the denial. It appears the applicant is requesting this Board to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01595
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01595 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of separation (DOS) from active duty in the Regular Air Force be adjusted to reflect the day before his appointment in the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) in order to eliminate his break in service. DPT states the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05531-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2001. Opportunity to draw education benefits from the VEGIB Program ended on 31 December 1989. b. VEGIB Program members who were on active duty any time between 19 October 1984 and 1 July 1985 and served continuously from that date through 30 June 1988, followed by four years in the Selected Reserves, had their remaining entitlement converted to Montgomery...