Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08924-02
Original file (08924-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
                                                                                                   JLP:ddj
                                                                                                   Docket No: 8924-02
                                                                                                   26 August 2003


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 26 August 2003. 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 CNO memorandum 5420 N13OD/03U0561 of 8 August 2003, 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. 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. 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 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 NAVY
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
2000 NAVY PENTAGON
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20350-2000
                                                                                                   IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                    5420

N13QD/ 03U0561
8 Aug 2003
MEMORANDUM FOR THE       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    COMI>IENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF LIEUTENANT

Ref:     (a) D0DFMR vol 7A ch 8 & ch 11
End:     (1) BCNR case file #08924-02
1.       The following provides comment and recommendation on LTJG petition.
2.       Nl30 recommends disapproval of his petition for Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP), Dive, Demolition and HALO parachute pay for 10 October 2000 through 01 June 2001.
3.       While assigned to COMLANDCENT, LTJG served as a GM2 (SEAL) communications expert from 10 October 2000 through 01 June 2001. He claims he is entitled to SDAP, Dive, Demolition and HALO parachute pay for this amount of time.
4.       In accordance with Navy policy, to receive SDAP, demolition and HALO parachute pay member must be assigned to and working in an authorized billet. During his time on active duty member was not filling a SEAL billet and his orders did not authorize or assign him to diving, HALO parachute jumps or demolition duty as required by ref (a) - No supporting documentation has been provided to show member was in a billet authorizing the special pays requested. There is no required change to LTJG records. No further action is necessary.
5.       BCNR case file with microfiche service record is returned herewith as enclosure (1) -



Head, Enlisted Bonus
Programs Branch

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04038-02

    Original file (04038-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2003. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 2000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C. 20350-2000 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 N13OD1 /03U0180 6 Mar 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDSSubj: COMMENT AND RECOMMENDAT Q IN THE CASE OFEnd: (1) BCNR case file #04038-02 with microfiche service record1. SDAP...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03715-99

    Original file (03715-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03577-99

    Original file (03577-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06629-00

    Original file (06629-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 7000 Ser of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01272-01

    Original file (01272-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    opinion furnished by BUPERS memorandum of 1160 PERS 815 of 13 June 2001, a copy of which 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. The petitioner was attached on board UIC 62229. b.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06349-02

    Original file (06349-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2003. an EB. Petty Officer received an EB contract upon entry into the DEP.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 0054-01

    Original file (0054-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 Encl : F:orm 149 w/attachments (1) DD (2) CNO memorandum 5420 N (3) Subject ’s naval record 130D l/O 1 U 1175 of 2 August 2001 Pursuant to th#E provisions of reference (a), Subject hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, 1. filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show entitlement to Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Beckett, Caron, and Ms. Madison, reviewed 5 September 2001 and,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01904-01

    Original file (01904-01.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 to show entitlement to Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Beckett, Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 September 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05067-03

    Original file (05067-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL R E C O R D S 2 NAVY ANNEX W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0 JLP:ddj Docket No: 5067-03 10 October 2003 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. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00858-06

    Original file (00858-06.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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. San Diego, CA for shore duty with a Projected Rotation Date (PRD) of December 2005. lAW Ref(a) to maintain his CONSUBPAY eligibility, he needed to extend/reenlist through February...