Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10071-07
Original file (10071-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                  2 NAVY ANNEX    
                  WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                           TRG
          Docket No: 10071—07
                                              22 May 2008


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 13 May 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 an advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command, a copy of which is enclosed and your rebuttal there to.
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 a 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
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
                                             MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000


                                    1811
                                                                                                    PERS-822
                                                                                                   3 Jan 08


MEMORANDUM FOR   EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         
         Via:     Assistant for BCNR Matters, PERS-31C
        
         Subj     CONNENTS AND RECOMMENDATION     


Ref:     (a) NPC memo 5420 PERS-31C of 5 Dec 07
End:     (1) NNPC-23 ltr 1800 of 2 Nov 84
 (2)      CTACM ltr of 19 Oct 07
(3)      N-152 email of 23 Oct 07
(4)      Basic Pay Chart - 1 Oct 76
                   (5) BCNR File
1.       Reference (a) request comments and recommendations in subjects case. Specifically, Petitioner requests correction of retired status to reflect his highest grade held of Chief Warrant Officer-2 (CWO2)
2.       Petitioner was offered advancement on the retired list in November 1984 and advised it would result in a loss of pay, as shown in enclosure (1) . . As of August 1985 no reply was received from the retiree and the record was closed out.
3.       Petitioner contacted Retired Operations Section (N-152), enclosure (2), requesting clarification on retired status. Query was replied to by Head, Retired Operations Section, as shown in enclosure (3) . . Petitioner was provided guidance and documentation on how and who to apply to for advancement on the retired list.
4.       Per enclosure (4) advancement on the retired list to the grade of CWO2 would result in a loss of pay. Recommend Petitioner remain on the retired list in the paygrade of Master Chief Petty Officer/E-9. No further action is required, enclosure (5) is returned.


Branch Head, Officer Retirements

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06555-06

    Original file (06555-06.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 the Navy Personnel Command dated 31 August 2007, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01587-09

    Original file (01587-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your previous case, docket number 11271-07, was denied on 15 May 2008. 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. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) [or use by the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08237-07

    Original file (08237-07.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 the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 October 2007 with enclosure, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03177-06

    Original file (03177-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memorandums 1430 Ser 48llE9/375, 13 June 2006 and 11 December 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. Based on policy and guidelines established in reference (a), enclosure (1) is returned with the following...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03070-09

    Original file (03070-09.pdf) 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. The petitioner is requesting advancement to E5. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) for use by the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10920-07

    Original file (10920-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When you were informed of the command's intent to deny your reenlistment you appealed that denial to the Navy Personnel Command. 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. As denial of reenlistment requests are not considered administrative processing, the member would not have had the opportunity to elect an administrative board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01349-06

    Original file (01349-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by NPC memorandum 1920, Ser 4834/031, 21 Jun 06 and NPC letter, 5420 POOJ6/1l3, 19 October 2006, a copy of each is attached. Members advanced under these procedures must be serving, in temporary officer status on the date enlisted advancement is effected.6. Accordingly,met both requirements in Aug 04, and his advancement to E—8 would have been effective 1 Jul 04.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01413-08

    Original file (01413-08.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. 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. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) for the use by the Board for correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08715-07

    Original file (08715-07.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. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) for the use by the Board for correction of Naval Records...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09999-07

    Original file (09999-07.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 NPC memorandum 1430 Ser 811/034 of 11 January 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 to...