Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10250-02
Original file (10250-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE  NAVY 

BOARD  FOR  CORRECTION  OF  NAVAL  RECORDS 

2  N A V Y A N N E X  

WASHINGTON  D C   20370-5100 

TRG 
Docket No:  10250-02 
13 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 6 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. 

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 Navy on 11 April 1996 with a guarantee for 
training in the Nuclear Power Program and a potential 
reenlistment bonus.  You successfully completed the program and, 
on 22 July 1997, you reported to the USS NEVADA  (SSBN 733)(BLUE). 
On 1 September 1998 you reenlisted in the Navy for six years and 
received a selective reenlistment bonus  (SRB)  of $17,988.33. 
Subsequently, you made several deployments aboard the NEVADA. 
You were transferred on 12 September 2000. 

On 16 April 2001 you requested designation as a conscientious 
objector.  On 10 July 2001 an investigating officer (10) 
recommended your classification as a conscientious objector and 
noted that you were willing to serve in a noncombatant status to 
fulfill your commitment to the Navy.  The I0 suggested that one 
possibility for a noncombatant assignment was a submarine tender, 
as long as you never had to be part of a security team or a gun 
mount team.  After review, it was determined that you were a 
conscientious objector.  In connection with this review, you 
continued to request retention in the Navy. 

On 13 November 2001 the detailer reviewed your file and 

recommended that you be discharged because there were no 
noncombatant assignments in your rating.  Accordingly, on 13 
November 2001, the discharge authority disapproved your request 
for retention in a noncombatant status but directed an honorable 
discharge by reason of "conscientious objectorn.  The discharge 
directive also stated that recoupment of the unearned portion of 
the reenlistment bonus and all other indebtedness was required. 
You were honorably discharged on 29 November 2001.  The payment 
for your lump sum leave was retained to offset your indebtedness. 

In January 2002, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service 
(DFAS) informed you that you were indebted in the amount of 
$7,816.78. You were given the opportunity to pay this amount in 
installments. 

You contend in your application that repayment of the debt is not 
warranted because your request for retention was favorably 
endorsed by the chain of command.  You believe that the direction 
for discharge was contrary to regulations and the requirement to 
repay the indebtedness is unjust. 

Concerning recoupment of reenlistment bonuses, the law states 
that unless an individual is discharged by reason of hardship or 
disability, the unearned portion of the reenlistment bonus must 
be repaid.  The law does not allow for the waiver of an 
indebtedness if the payment which led to the indebtedness was 
proper when paid.  The law also allows the Secretary of the Navy 
or a designee, to remit or cancel any part of an enlisted 
member's indebtedness which remains unpaid before, or at the time 
of an enlisted member's honorable discharge. 

It is clear from the regulations that the Navy Personnel Command 
was authorized to direct retention or discharge in cases 
involving conscientious objectors.  It is also clear that you 
were aware of the applicable regulatory provisions concerning 
conscientious objectors.  Since there were no noncombatant 
billets for a nuclear trained petty officer, the Board concluded 
that your discharge was proper and a change in the reason for 
that discharge is not warranted.  Further, there is no basis in 
the record to support a discharge by reason of hardship or 
physical disability.  Since the amount you owe was proper when it 
was paid there is no basis for a waiver of the indebtedness. 

Concerning a possible remission of the indebtedness, the Board 
noted that the Navy fulfilled its part of the bargain by 
providing you with an excellent technical education and paying 
you a reenlistment bonus in exchange for additional service. 
Although your failure to complete your part of the bargain was 
unfortunate, the Board did not believe that the circumstances 
warranted remission of the indebtedness.  The Board also noted 
that the amount you are indebted is very minor when weighed 

against the training you received. 

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, 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09696-02

    Original file (09696-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2003. 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 | 05958-97

    Original file (05958-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, be corrected by changing the reason for discharge or, in the alternative, that the record be corrected to show that the unearned portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) was not recouped. portion of my...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07447-97

    Original file (07447-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (b) SECNAVINST 7220.383 (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 filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by reinstating him to active duty, changing the reason for discharge or, in the alternative, that the record be corrected to show that the unearned portion of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007492

    Original file (20140007492.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant served the required ADSO incurred through receipt of this incentive. The reason for debt states: "Recoupment is required for the unearned portion of your enlistment or reenlistment bonus based on your separation code BNC. Records indicate the applicant received a $30,000.00 CSRB on 26 May 2012 which obligated him to a 60-month ADSO.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006322

    Original file (20080006322.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s records show that she enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 23 January 2003 for a period of 8 years. Section III (Acknowledgement) of the applicant’s DA Form 5261-R (Selected Reserve Incentive Program-Enlistment Bonus Addendum) shows that in connection with her enlistment in the USAR, she elected “assignment to a unit (high priority) authorized by Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) for a bonus entitlement in a military occupational specialty (MOS) that is also...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02194

    Original file (BC-2005-02194.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of her separation she had been disqualified from Air Traffic Control duties and had been continued on active duty awaiting waivers and Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) processing. With regard to the presence of medical conditions that were potentially disqualifying for controller duties, the Medical Consultant states the fact that she decided to voluntarily separate under pregnancy provisions rather than remain on active duty and complete the planned evaluations and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020967

    Original file (20090020967.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his warrant officer (WO) accession date from 9 June 2007 to 19 July 2007. A DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 28 June 2006, shows the applicant extended his [then] current enlistment agreement of 17 December 1994 in the ARNGUS and PAARNG with an expiration of term of service of 19 July 2006 for a period of 6 years to accept a 6-year $15,000 bonus. Title 37, U.S. Code, section 308i (Special pay: prior service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05566-05

    Original file (05566-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07368-01

    Original file (07368-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show reinstatement on active duty or a change in the reenlistment code. However, after reviewing the Navy's evaluation, the Board concludes that even if Petitioner did not have a personality disorder, his problems were sufficiently severe to warrant discharge. The Board notes that portion of the DVA evaluation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007561

    Original file (20080007561.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 March 2007, he reenlisted for a period of 6 years (72 months) and a Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) bonus of $15,000.00. However, section 7-8 (Termination with recoupment), which curiously follows section 7-9, specifically provides for recoupment of the unearned portion of a reenlistment bonus, effective to the date of entry on AGR status, when a Soldier accepts an AGR position on Title 10 or Title 32 and has served less than six months of the incentive contract following the...