Sa, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
s
BER Zs BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
ig eames 701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR2082-14
20 Jan 15
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 20 January 2015. 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 CNRFC memo 5420 Ser N1/1169 of 20
Nov 14, 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 making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. .
The Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Act (Post-9/11 GI
Bill, Public Law 110-252) was signed into law on 30 June 2008
and became effective on 1 August 2009. General descriptions of
the essential components of the new law were widely available
beginning in summer 2008 and specific implementing guidance was
published in the summer of 2009.
Under the governing regulations, to be eligible to transfer
benefits, a member must be on active duty or in the selective
reserve at the time of the election to transfer. This is an
important feature of the law because the transferability
provisions are intended as an incentive vice a benefit. Members
se a Ne
Docket No. NR2082-14
who are retired are not eligible to transfer their education
benefits.
Evidence shows that you failed to take the steps necessary to
transfer benefits. Your application claims, (Mon 23
Jun’01 falsely claimed on Montgomery GI Bill - Selected Reserve
Record Adjustment/Audit Worksheet, that I was transferred to the
IRR on 14 Nov 1999." You further claimed that, “I have provided
documentation that I was an active participant up until I went
into the IRR in Nov 00 and reaffiliated with a new unit at Pt.
Mugu on 24 Feb 2001.” Furthermore, as part of your application,
you included a copy of your Re-Affiliation Waiver dated 29 March
2001, acknowledging then that the date you were last terminated
from.inactive duty was 14 November 2000.
The Board found that though you may have been actively drilling,
you were drilling as a member of the Individual Ready Reserve
(IRR). When you voluntarily transferred to the IRR, you
transferred from the Selective Reserve (SELRES) and terminated
your Montgomery GI Bill - Selected Reserve (MGIB-SR} (Basic)
Statement of Understanding (SOU) you signed when you joined the
- drilling Navy Reserve, along with the Notice of Basic
- Eligibility (NOBE). The MGIB-SR required that you serve: six
years of Inactive-Duty Training (IDT) drilling in the Selective
Reserve. Under these circumstances, the Board found that no
relief is warranted. Accordingly, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.
The Board members also considered your request for a personal
appearance; however, they found that the issues in the case were
adequately documented and that a personal appearance would not
materially add to the Board's understanding of the issues
involved. Thus, your request for a personal appearance has been
denied.
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
evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it
is important to keep in mind that a presumption of reguiarity
attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying
for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on
a
Docket No. NR2082-14
the applicant to demonstrate the ¢€
error or injustice.
xistence of probable material
Sincerely,
pi vet flne(/
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure: CNRFC memo 5420 Ser N1/1169 of 20 Nov 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5730 14
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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3933 14
“tn addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion Furnished by CNRFC ltr 5420 Ser wi/osss5 of 25 Aug 14, 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. The Board found that NAVADMIN 203/09 published in June 2009 provided the procedures members are required to follow to transfer the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9487 13
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 CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/126 of 7 Feb 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9235 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Therefore I signed on for four years into the Navy Reserves to meet this stipulation.” you further claim that after your wife applied for and was accepted at a university, that “It has now come to my attention, as I tried to transfer my benefits and got denied, that I was wrongfully informed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03604-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PERS-352G of 5 Jun 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. Per reference (c), members who initially entered active duty after 30 June 1985 and immediately enrolled in the MGIB Program, are eligible to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06291-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. 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. Reference (d) offered MGIB Program enrollment to active duty members with money in a VEAP account on 9 October 1996 (date of enactment).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10032-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, | sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November. 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 | CY2014 | NR3753 14
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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6468 14
{ ) al r a) ¢ a Tm 6d \ > gus oO 4 t cd ie) ) i ) r AUT) oti C { QO -d C ay) ty 43 GS o S es b Docket No. Members who are retired are not eligible to cransfer your education benefits. The Board found that there was not revision to the Post-9/11 GI Bill law or policy in December 2009 as you claim.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5258 13
NR5258-13 22 Nov 13 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: {a} Title 10 U.&.C. 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 transfer Post-9/11 GI Bill Benefits to his dependents. The Board, consisting of Mr. Pfeiffer, Mr. Zsalman, and Mr. Exnicios, reviewed...