DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 351-10
17 March 2010
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF Sail a a
Ref: -(a} 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2) Case summary with advisory opinion
3) Subject's naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former member of the Navy Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this
Board requesting that the his record be corrected to refiect his
active duty start date as 10 January 2008 instead of 11 January
2008,
oard, consisting of Mr, es. Mr. <@@em, and Ms.
t reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
‘injustice on 16 March 2010 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In
addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by
the Navy Personnel Command, Augmentation Division (PERS-4G),
dated 25 February 2010, a copy of which is attached to enclosure
(2).
3, The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as
follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
> co. Petitioner, while serving in paygrade E-7, began a period
of active duty on 10 January 2008. On 31 October 2008 he was
honsrably released from active duty and transferred to the Navy
Reserve upon completion of his required active service.
d. In January 2008, Petitioner was issued a Certificate of
Discharge or Release from Active Duty (DD Form 214) which
reflected a date of entry to active duty as 11 January 2008. In
this regard, an advisory opinion from PERS-4G recommended
correction of this erroneous date. The advisory opinion stated,
in part, that a simple processing error occurred when Petitioner
gained to active duty, and as such his gain date should be
amended to 10 January 2008, and that all appropriate changes
should be made to the record.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. In this regard, the Board substantially concurs with the
comments and recommendations contained in the advisory opinion.
Specifically, the Board concludes that his record be corrected to
reflect that he entered active duty on 10 January 2008, and that
all appropriate changes be made to ensure his entitlement to pay,
benefits, and retirement points.
Based on the foregoing the Board concludes that no useful purpose
is served by continuing to show that Petitioner entered active
duty on 11 January 2008, and as such finds the existence of an
error and injustice warranting the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
-a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he entered active duty on 10 January 2008 vice 11 January 2008.
b. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to ensure his
appropriate entitlement to pay, benefits, and retirement points
be based on his active duty entry date of 10 January 2008.
c. That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.
d. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be
informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board
on 7 January 2010.
4, It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN BRIAN asin Bagh GHORGE
Recorder Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6{e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
\e Dace
W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03776-09
Accordingly... we correctly transferred [him] to the Retired Reserve effective 1 January 2009 and notified him of such action... ...NOSC [Navy Operational Support Center], Atlanta evidently advised that he was not on their mandatory retirement list and than he was not required to retire. 8301, requires that the effective date of any retirement be the first day of the month. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10656 11
Under BUPERINST 1430.16F, (Advancement Manual for Enlisted Personnel of the U.S. Navy and U.S. Navy Reserve), all personnel designated in certain ratings, including Petitioner’s rating, “must maintain, as a minimum, continuous security clearance eligibility.” This provision has been interpreted by NPC to mean that, in order to be eligible to participate in an advancement cycle, take an advancement exam or advance to the next highest grade, a Sailor in one of the designated ratings must hold...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06079-11
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) Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to validate her E-6/YN1 Navy-wide advancement examinations and show that that her E-6/YN1 examinations from September 2008 through September 2010 be validated and receive PNA points to be applied to her March 2011 exam. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00712-11
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 3 October 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. g. Upon being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status in December 2010, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. He had advanced...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10262 11
The Board, consisting of Messrs. pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 25 June 2012 and, pursuant to 4ts regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be teken on the available evidence of record. In March 2011, after being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. VOZ62-12 that Petitioner...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07085-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. In September 2010, with his final adjudicated clearance, he participated in the E6/AE1 Navy-wide advancement examination and was selected and advanced with an effective date of 16 June 2011. j. Petitioner has applied to this Board seeking to have his E6/AE1 advancement exams validated retroactively for PNA points to apply toward his September 2009 advancement exam. NPC and CNO...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03447-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 LCC 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 that Petitioner is entitled to Post-Mobilization Respite Absence. The Board, consisting of Messrs. George, Pfeiffer, and 4salman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11040-08
The TEMADD orders further directed that she was to e-mail IAHHG@navy.mil for instructions if she had household goods (HHG) to move or to be placed in storage. time between the orders and the proceed date was fairly short, the orders were in support of a contingency operation, making arrangements for such an assignment in so short a time period is complex, and the cost of providing the relief is low as compared to the government cost for moving and Docket No. Accordingly, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06253-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and Exnicios, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 7 February 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Moreover, because the March 2008 E-5 advancement exam cycle had a 100% advancement rate,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06780-11
g. In September 2010, Petitioner again participated in the E6/AZ1 advancement exam. Apparently, neither Petitioner, her command, nor NPC were aware that she was ineligible to participate in the exam cycles. Therefore, the Board concludes that the record should be corrected to validate Petitioner’s E-6/AZ1 advancement examinations from the relevant cycles and Petitioner should be advanced from the September 2010 exam cycle.