Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10843-07
Original file (10843-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
                           MEH
                                                                                          Docket No. 10843-07
                                                                                          4 Feb 08


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 4 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 1780 PER5-352G of 23 Jan 08, 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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application, and your request for a personal appearance before the Board, has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon written 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 Dire ctor
Enclosure




DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000
1780
 PERS— 352G
23 Jan 08

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Via: Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS—3lC)
Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ICO
         Ref:     (a)      CNPC memo 5420 PERS-3lC of 16 Jan 08
                  (b)      Title 38, United States Code, Chapter 32
                  (C)      Veterans Improvement Act of 1996 (PL 104—275)
                  (d)      Veterans Benefits and Health Care Improvement Act of
                           2000 (Pt 106-419)
1. The following is provided in response to reference (a)
a.       Per reference (b), the Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) was available to members who entered the military for the first time between 1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985. It was closed to new enrollments on 30 June 1985, but reopened for five months from 28 October 1986 to 31 March 1987. Notification of the open period and final closure of VEAP was given widest dissemination.
b.       DD Form 2057, Contributory Education Assistance Program - Statement of Understanding, had two parts. Part I informed the prospective member that they were eligible to participate in VEAP and briefly described the requirements of the program. signed this portion on 4 September 1984. Part II was to be completed during reception station processing or at the member’s first duty station. In completing this portion, member’s documented their decision to either (1) voluntarily participate in VEAP and how much they intended to contribute monthly, or (2) not participate with the understanding they could enroll in the program any time during their service on active duty. Part II of the DD Form 2057 submitted by was not completed. Only those members who elected to enroll in VEAP and had their disbursing office start an allotment to a VEAP account are considered participants. Members who did not elect to participate in VEAP upon initial entry had a second opportunity during the VEAP open period. could have become a VEAP participant at this time, but he did not. If members did not participate by the close of the open period, they lost the opportunity to do so because Congress closed the program for the last time on 31 March 1987.


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



Subj:    REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ICO

c.       Reference (c) offered MGIB Program enrollment to active duty members with money in a VEAP account on 9 October 1996 (date of enactment) . Per reference (d), an individual who was a VEAP participant on or before 9 October 1996 and served continuously from that date through at least 1 April 2000 was allowed an opportunity to convert from VEAP to the MGIB Program. Unfortunately, no provisions were made in references (c) or (d) for members like - who did not participate in VEAP.
d.       flJ . states in his petition that he “called the 0.1. Bill Branch at BUPERS and was advised that there was a window of opportunity for Sailors who enlisted under VEAP to change to the 0.1.
 Bill Program...”.         When a member/veteran calls our office with the same
situation as     we advise them that there was second
 opportunity to participate in VEAP which was from 28 October 1986 through 31 March 1987. As previously stated, only VEAP participants had opportunities to convert to the MGIB Program.
e.       We recommend denial of request. He did not elect to participate in VEAP before 1 July 1985, or during a second opportunity, the VEAP open enrollment period. Additionally, since was not a VEAP participant, he was not eligible for conversion to the MGIB Program. VEAP was never a very popular program, and it is only now when members/veterans are retiring or considering further education that they are requesting enrollment in VEAP with conversion to the more beneficial MGIB Program. Although we believe all who have served on active duty deserve quality education benefits, allowing those who didn’t participate in VEAP before the legislated deadlines to enroll now, with or without subsequent enrollment in the MGIB Program, would create an inequity to the thousands of other Sailors who also didn’t participate and now have no education benefits

2. PERS—352G’s point of contact is Ms. Barbara Miller who can be reached at (DSN) 882—4259 or (C) 901—874—4259.

Head, GI Bill Programs Section
(PERS—352G)
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05606-07

    Original file (05606-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    5606-07 28 Aug 07This 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 28 August 2007. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PERS-352G of 27 Jul 07, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09111-07

    Original file (09111-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PERS-352G of 26 Nov 07, 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. Reference (c) offered the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) Program enrollment to active duty members with money in a VEAP account on 9 October 1996 (date of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07951-07

    Original file (07951-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PERS-352G of 17 Oct 07, 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. Only those members who elected to enroll in VEAP and had their disbursing office start an allotment to a VEAP account are considered participants.b We...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00644-06

    Original file (00644-06.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.Sincerely,W. For veterans and members like who entered during VEAP era and were not eligible for MGIB Program enrollment, we would not expect to find a CI Bill program document in their service record. If the member didn’t elect to enroll in VEAP initially, they had a second opportunity during the VEAP open enrollment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00488-07

    Original file (00488-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 Ser 352G/254 of 20 Feb 07, 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. Reference (c) offered the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) Program enrollment to active duty members with money in a VEAP account on 9 October 1996 (date...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04694-06

    Original file (04694-06.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. Per reference (d), an individual who was a VEAP participant on or before 9 October 1996 and served continuously from that date through at least 1 April 2000 was allowed an opportunity to convert from VEAP to the MGIB Program. For veterans and members like de Wh entered during VEAP era and were not eligible for MGIB...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04904-01

    Original file (04904-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2001. The following is provided in response to reference (a): Recommend the Board deny GSMC request to enroll VEAP was available to members who entered the tfe Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP). he is not eligible to enroll in the MGIB Program per reference (d).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06633-06

    Original file (06633-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Consequently, when applying for a correctionof an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Per reference (b) , the Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) was available to members who entered the military for the first time between 1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985. A review of record indicates he did not participate in VEAP before 1 July T~5, or by the end of the VEAP open period, 31 March 1987.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00759-06

    Original file (00759-06.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.SincerelyW. He had from the time he completed the DD Form 2057 until Congress closed VEAP to new enrollments for the last time on 31 March 1987 to start an allotment and become a participant. Although we believe all who have served on active duty deserve quality education benefits, allowing those who didn’t participate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02150-07

    Original file (02150-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considerate 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 NP~ memo 1780 PERS-352G of 11 Apr 07, 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...