Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08012-02
Original file (08012-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVYANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

LCC:ddj
Docket No: 8012-02
10 December 2002

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.

& accordance with administrative regulations and 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session,
considered your application on 10 December 2002. Your allegations of error and 
iqjustice were
the
reviewed 
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 NPC memorandum 5420 Pers 911 of 8 November 2002, a copy of which
attached.

pr&edures applicable to 

is

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
In this regard, it is important
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.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE

  NAV Y

NAVY  PERSO NNEL 
MILLINGTON TN  

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

COMMAND
38055-0000

5420
Pers-911
8 Nov 02

MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE MATTERS/CONGRESSIONAL

ADVISOR OFFICE/BCNR CORDINATOR  

(PERS-OOZCB)

Subj:

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF

Ref: (a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

1533.12F  of 14 May 98

CNETINST 
42 COMPGEN 669; B-150780, June 7, 1963
45 COMPGEN 363; B-158027, December 20, 1965
\
Title 10 U.S.C.

(1) BCNR memo  

!5420 PERS-OOZCB of 5 Nov 02

Enclosure (1) is returned with the recommendation that CAPT

s request to add  30 days of additional active duty to his
ement of Service for Naval Reserve retirement, be denied. We
will complete his Naval Reserve career on 1
nearly 2800 points,

and is eligible for

note that

retired pay at age 60.

Encl:
1.

References 

(b)  and 

(c) authorized summer

A review of

As contained in reference (a),

2.
the summer training periods
held annually for NROTC midshipmen students are normally four to
eight weeks in length.
training periods held annually for NROTC midshipmen students as
creditable service under section 1405 of reference 
3.
that he accepted an
program on September 16,
U.S. Navy on June 
training period would have been authorized by official NROTC
Summer Cruise orders,
his arrival

which would have been endorsed upon both
CAPT
permanent personnel record contains no such orders, nor
documentation (for example, page 13 entries, pay
travel or subvouchers,

's permanent personnel record shows
ment as a midshipman in the NROTC

and departure from the training activity.

1971 and was later commissioned in the

As an NROTC student, each summer

etc.) to determine the dates of

8,.1973.

CAPT

(d).

vouchers,
his summer training period.

4.
The number of actual days served by NROTC students on summer
training cruises can vary from as little as three weeks to up to
eight weeks.
excused from a summer training period for valid reasons.

We also understand that students are sometimes

*

Subj:

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF

Therefore,
documentation specifically indicate arrival/departure dates as a
prerequisite to adjusting a retirement point record.

we feel it necessary that summer training cruise

CAPT.

Additionally,

Documentation provided by 

5.
circumstantially indicates that he
in July 1972.
a midshipman'
This supports
days of duty.
the pay was for a summer training cruise or to identify the
specific dates of the training.

in enclosure (1)
e been in a pay status
our research indicates 
act,  50 per cent of an Ensign's pay.
30
contention that he was paid for 
there is no documentation to verify that

However,

that,in  1972,

Because this issue involves a financial obligation for the

6.
U.S. Government,
circumstantial evidence.
these types of requests in our regular correspondence and we have
always enforced a consistent policy of requiring specific
documentation before agreeing to update an individual's

we can not support making a decision based on
We receive a substantial number of

t record.
ase as well.
s ability to try to correct his record. We

We believe this policy should apply to

there is no time limit

Additionally,

encourage him to continue his research into this matter.
want to contact the Defense Finance and Accounting Service 
at l-800-255-0974 to see if they have pay records on him back to
1972.
they may be able to identify the period for which
he was paid.
We will be glad to reconsider our recommendation if
he finds new information.

If so,

He may
(DFAS)

If BCNR decides to

7.
need to be provided with constructive starting and ending dates
for his active duty period to allow us to update his record.

s request, we will

approv

8.
commercial 

Point of contact in this matter is 

(901)  874-4497 or DSN 882-4497.

CD-  PERS-911, at

Director,
Administration Division

Naval Reserve Personnel

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05391-01

    Original file (05391-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    is returned with the recommendation that CAPT sure request, to add 126 days of additional active duty to his Statement of Service for Naval Reserve retirement, be denied. Therefore, this service, when performed, should have been documented in the member's permanent personnel record. s permanent personnel record contains no such orders, nor As an NROTC midshipmen Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02248-02

    Original file (02248-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Therefore, we can not recommend just adding 126 days active duty to his Statement of Service for his Naval Reserve Retirement Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF unless we have documentation in order to support...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04354-02

    Original file (04354-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 5420 Pers attached. 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. (c) authorized the summer training of an officer as a non-academy midshipman as creditable service under section 1405 of reference (d).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01307-01

    Original file (01307-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 May 2001. opinion furnished by BUPERS memorandum 7220 is attached. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08507-01

    Original file (08507-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 June 2002. 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. He was promoted to the rank of Commander in November 2000 and has completed more than 18 years of qualifying service towards retirement.

  • 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 | CY2002 | 05388-02

    Original file (05388-02.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. - Inactive) status when you were Sl (Standby-Reserve Active) status on 6 August 1996, as you had expressed no The Board found it would not have been appropriate for cognizant naval authorities to bring up the possibility of transferring you to S2 (Standby Reserve transferred to interest in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01759-02

    Original file (01759-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    This is a strong statement when another senior chaplain in the Navy can make a signed statement that XXXX had the capacity of bias in fitness reports. I recommend XXXX fitness reports dated 94AUG31 to 95JAN31 and 95FEBO to 96JAN31 be removed from his permanent record and that he be considered in-zone at the next regularLieutenant Command r promotion board. Based on the comments provided in references (b) and (c), we believe the fitness reports in question should be removed from Lieuten

  • 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 | 02272-01

    Original file (02272-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...