Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03970-07
Original file (03970-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                      WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


DJC
 Docket No. 3970-07
12 February 2008


Dear   
                         
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 11 February 2008. 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 NPC Memo 1000 B U PERS 325 dtd 23 Jan 08, 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.
S incerely,


W.       DEAN PF IEF F E R
Executive Dir ector





Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
                                                      MILLINGTON, TN 38055.0000



1000
 B U PERS 325
 23 Jan 08


MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTIONS OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR)
Via:     BUPERS/BCNR COORDINATOR, PERS-OOZCB
Subj:    COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE OF
Ref:     (a) BCNR Memo of 26 October 2007
1.       In March 2006, the Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Enlisted Community Manager began the process to establish a Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB) for EOD Master Technicians (NEC 5337) . On 24 April 2007, NAVADMIN 102/07 announced the approval and implementation of the EOD CSRB for qualified EOD Master Technicians (NEC 5337) . Paragraph 2.b stated “Members who reenlisted before the effective date of this EOD CSRB program will complete the term of their existing contract before becoming eligible for an EOD CSRB”.
2. In December 2004,     signed a 27 month extension to meet obligated service requirements for PCS orders. On 17 October 2006, 27 month extension became operative, adjusting his EACS to 17 January 2009.
3.       The aforementioned dates of extension agreement and extension going operative were prior to the period between the EOD CSRB initiation and implementation of March 2006 and April 2007 respectively. In accordance with the policy set forth in NAVADMIN 102/07, paragraph 2.b must complete the term of his existing contract before becoming eligible for an EOD CSRB.
         4.       Based on the above information, I recommend disapproval of
 petition to cancel his 27 month extension agreement and reenlist for EOD CSRB prior to his 17 January 2009 EAOS. is eligible for EOD CSRB on 17 January 2009.

H ead Enlisted Community Manager

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02967-07

    Original file (02967-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.W. The member requests the full 48 months SRB based on the OTT reenlistment authorization. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) for the use by the Board for correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07426-09

    Original file (07426-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    7426-09 23 Feb 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. On 19 May 2009, Petitioner’s Commanding Officer approved the reenlistment request. After reviewing the circumstances, N130 granted Petitioner a “waiver” to the limitation that “Commands must submit SRB requests via OPINS 35-120 days in advance of the sailor's EAOS or reenlistment date” provided Petitioner reenlist on 2 July 2009 as...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00311-07

    Original file (00311-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    311-07 14 March 2007This 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 13 March 2007. 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.ncerely,W. This is an advisory...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08680-07

    Original file (08680-07.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. 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,DEAN PFEIFFERExecutive DirectorEnclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND5720 INTEGRITY...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00557-07

    Original file (00557-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100DJCDocket No. 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 establish entitlement to a zone “A” Selective Reenlistment Bonus(SRB).2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Bourgeois, Mr. Boyd, and Mr. Hicks, J., reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07481-08

    Original file (07481-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. 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 restoration of Petitioner’s Navy Enlisted Classification Code (NEC) of 5335 (Senior Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician) . h. In June 2007, over two years after the NEC was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05798-09

    Original file (05798-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 2009. 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 | CY2007 | 08932-07

    Original file (08932-07.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. 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. The petitioner reenlisted for four years on 07 May 2007.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03669-06

    Original file (03669-06.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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1160 Ser 4811/743 dtd 21 Dec 06, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00675-09

    Original file (00675-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS - 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 bIC Docket No. 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 establish entitlement to a Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB). The Board, consisting of Mr. Pfeiffer, Mr. Zsalman, and Mr. George, reviewed PetitLoner’s allegations of error...