an]
ea
< es
e\ DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
9 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §, COURTHOUSE ROAD, Suite 1001

ARLINGTON, VA 22204

 
 

JET
Docket No. NR2737-14
5 Dec 14

om Cqoiyman, Koara ror Correction of Naval kecoras

prom. ede he te ane RY

Toe: Secretary of the Navy

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO

 

Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) CNO memo 7220 Ser N130D/14U0802 of 23 Jun 14
(3) OCNO Policy Decision Memorandum (PDM) 008-13 0
26 Apr 13
) OS2 Westhafer’s rebuttal rec’d 19 Aug 14
) CNO memo 7220 Ser N1L30D/14U1180 of 9 Sep 14
) O82 Westhafer’s email of 14 Oct 14 rec'd 6 Nov 14

via

Ph

or, WI

1. 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

= a 4 an - 7 + ae oe aot te] a aes ain de>:
record De corrected to establish entitlement to Sea Duty

, consisting of AE RST ET ES |

arror 4d
errol me.

=
(D
©
Ae]
D
¢
'
(
H
9
o
a
wn
90)
bo
{+
m
Q
0

e ° £
injustice on 25 November 2014 ano, pursuant to its regulations
determined that the ective action indicatea below should b
taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary materi
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, 0

ava
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

a
O
ia}
6B
'
C

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. In March 2013 Petitioner was stationed aboard USS
STOCKDALE (DDG 106), and Petitioner was a second class petty
Docket No. NR2737-14

officer at the time. Petitioner claims that he originally
submitted his SDIP request on 135 August 2013. However, “due to
the process of the negotiating for orders, the paperwork was not
signed until September 12, 2013." BUPERS message 100939% OCT 13
disapproved Petitioner's request because it was not submitted

within the 11-13 month criteria that SpIP requests are required
me- enclosure (1). Petitioner had also been

to pe submiiLed. Sse Sileavewe=
issued orders on 25 September 2013 to the USS HARRY S. TRUMAN

before having received an approval for SDIP from Navy Personnel
Command (NPC) .°

 

c. On 25 November 2013 Petitioner applied to the Board to
titlement to SDIP-B claiming

-eve that the SDIP

reguest would be approved per reference (b), and the orders

released in September after my SDIP-B request approval.” See

enclosure (1). Petitioner has submitte
why Enlisted Personnel Action Request (NAVPERS 1306/7) was not

submitted within the required 11-13 month criteria.

d. In enclosure (2), the office having cognizance over the
subject matter recommended the request be denied, noting that
the main disqualifying factor that Petitioner did not qualify

for the SDIP-B pay was because he did not submit the Enlisted

Personnel Action Request (NAVPERS 1306/7) prior to selection for

follow on sea tour orders.

 

++al also included a copy ©

requests by NPC. His rebutta
MILPERSMAN 1000-025, Personnel Transaction Timeliness. However,

this did not provide justification for Petitioner submitting his
NAVPERS 1306/7 late.

£. In enclosure (5), the office having cognizance over the

subject matter reviewed Petitioner’s rebuttal in enclosure (4)

and recommended the request be denied. The advisory noted first

that Petitioner's %1306/7 was not submitted between 11-13 months

prior to his PST and he received orders before an approval

message was released. Per Reference (a) @@gp is not eligible
for SDIP.” Lastly, the advisory stated that “MILPERSMAN 1000-

 

 

1 Rnclosure (3), OPNAV Policy Decision Memorandum (PDM) 008-13 dated 26 Apr 13,

states, para. 6.b. To be eligible for SDIP, a Sailor must: (5) Have requested and been

approved for an SDIP Extension or Curtailment prior to receipt of follow-on Permanent

Change of Station (pcs) orders.”
Docket No. NR2737-14

025 CH-26 does not apply to Naval Personnel Command Staff. This
MISLPERSMAN applies to PSDs and the afloat units they service .*

g. On 6 November 2014, BCNR received a Congressional from
Congressman Rigell’s office forwarding an email dated 14 October
2014 yetves and QM,» ad also ©
handwritten timeline from Setitioner ef how long his SDIP
request was allegedly held up in the processing for submission
as additional information to his case. ‘see enclosure (6).

These additional documents, however, failed to take Ato
consideration the 4-6 months short of the 11-13 month SDIP
criteria he failed to meet, would have allowed him the added
time he required to have his SDIP request approved prior to him
receiving orders as required by enclosure (3).

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
notwithstanding the comments contained in enclosure (2)

Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. The Board substantially concurs with Petitioner that he
reasonably pelieved his detailer that his SDIP-B would be
approved and his orders released in September after his SDIP-B
request approval . additionally, the Board concluded that since
the Petitioner accepted orders to another ship and ig currently
doing back-to-back sea duty in an attempt to meet the intent of
the program, he should receive favorable consideration despite

failing to submit a timely request.

+at+-
a

RECOMMENDATION :

ce
Ce,

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropria
to show that:

a. Petitioner submitted a 1306/7 dated 13 August 2013 and
it was approved by his commanding officer on 12 September 2013,
and that it was then approved by higher competent authority on
24 September 2013, one day before he received orders to the USS

HARRY S. TRUMAN.

b. Petitioner is entitled to SDIP-B, at the rate of
$500.00 a month for 24 months (length of Petitioner’s current
tour length) a total of $12,000, minus taxes if applicable; to
be paid ina lump sum, while attached to the USS HARRY S. TRUMAN

(CVN 75) commencing on oF about 22 April 2014.

a areas
- ee ee ee ee ee ee ee
Docket No. NR2737-14

c. Note: In accordance with the guidance of PDM 008-13
dated 26 Apr 13, Petitioner must first contact his Personnel/
Administrative Department and sign and date 4 written SDIP-B
agreement NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) before he can be paid the
SDIP. Petitioner's personnel /Administrative Department should
forward a copy of the Page 13 to Navy Personnel Command (NPC)

via fax to eS

d. aA copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it 1s certified that 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. 7

(> VU

Bs The foregoing action. of
review and action.

 

    

(/
Y) |
ROBERT L. WOOD
Assistant General Counsel
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)
4000 Navy Pentagon, Rm 4D548
Washington, DC 20350-1000