Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05709-06
Original file (05709-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
         DEPARTMENT OFTHE NAVY
         BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 LCC
 Docket No. 5709-06
26 Sep 06







This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2006. 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 7220 Ser N130C4/06U0462, 21 August 2006, a copy of each is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of 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 also 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. 2O3~O-2OOO



 7220
Ser N130C4/06U0462
 21 Aug 06

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS


 Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters, Pers-OOXCB

Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ICO
         
         Ref:     (a)      DODFMR Volume 7A, Chapter 26
                  (b)      OPNAVINST 7220.12

 Encl: (1) BCNR Case File #05709-06
1.       Per your request, the following recommendation concerning enclosure (1) is provided.
2.       Enclosure (1) indicates a request for payment of Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) at the with-dependent rate for San Diego, CA (dependents location) vice Twenty-Nine Palms, CA (duty
 station) effective 31 Mar 06.

3.       A review of enclosure (1) revealed that the petitioner reported to the USS JOHN S MCCAIN (DDG 56) homeport of Yokosuka, Japan on 9 Sep 01. Petitioner was authorized an early return of his dependents on 15 Dec 05 from Yokosuka, JA to San Diego, CA. Based on this authorization petitioner was paid BAN based on his dependents location of San Diego, CA IAW reference (a)
4.       Petitioner reported to Naval Hospital Twenty-Nine Palms, CA on 31 Mar 06. lAW reference (a) paragraph 260107.B2, Low/No Cost moves effective July 1, 2001, the Secretary concerned may pay BAN based on the old station rate in situations involving low or no cost moves within the United States. Although the Petitioner was paid BAN based on dependents’ location due to an early return of dependents, his circumstances do not meet the criteria of reference (a), and (b). Petitioner’s last PDS of Yokosuka, JA is not in close proximity of Twenty-Nine Palms, CA.



For Official Use Only - Privacy Sensitive - Any misuse or unauthorized disclosure may result in both civil or criminal penalties.


 Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION ICO


5.       N13OC recommends disapproval of the petitioner’s request to draw BAH at dependents location (San Diego, CA).




          Assistant Head, Pay and
 Allowances Section (N13OC4)







































For Official Use Only - Privacy Sensitive - Any misuse or unauthorized disclosure may result in both civil or criminal penalties.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01516-07

    Original file (01516-07.rtf) 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 opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 7220 Ser Nl30C4/07U0247, 19 March 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06432-06

    Original file (06432-06.rtf) 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. 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. IAW reference (a), BAH entitlement is based on the member ‘s Permanent Duty Station (PDS)- Reference (b) allows...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08239-06

    Original file (08239-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    8239-06 1 Nov 06Dear Petty Officer:This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 Usc 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01820-07

    Original file (01820-07.rtf) 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 opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 7220 Ser N130C4/07U0250, 20 March 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07840-06

    Original file (07840-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    7840-06 1Nov06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. 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. IAW reference...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07288-06

    Original file (07288-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    7288-06 1 Nov 06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01550-06

    Original file (01550-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 7220 Ser N13OE/06U0493, 5 September 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 2000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C. 20350-2000 7220 Ser...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08277-06

    Original file (08277-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    8277-06 1 Nov 06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07875-06

    Original file (07875-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    7875-06 1 Nov 06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 7220 Ser N130C4/06U0557, 3 October 2006, a copy of each is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10730-07

    Original file (10730-07.rtf) 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 opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 7220 Ser N130C3/08U0321 of 9 May 2008, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient...