DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203705100

							    TRG
Docket No: 6425-06
1 February 2007

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

 Ref:	(a) Ti le 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Ca e Summary
(2) Subject’s naval record

1.	Pursuant o the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a retired enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, filed an application with this Boa d requesting that additional retirement points be credited.
	
 2.   The Board, consisting of Mr. , Mr reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on  17 January 2007 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.

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 w½hin the Department of the Navy.

b.	Although it appears that Petitioner’s application was not filed in timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of limitations and consider the application on its merits.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 3 August 1948 and remanded a member of. the Naval Reserve until he transferred t the Retired List on 16 January 1991, the day prior to his 60th birthday. In the first 22 years of his service, he has been ‘credited with 20 years of qualifying’ service. After 30 June 1970, he earned no further qualifying years.

d.	Attached to enclosure (1) is an advisory opinion from the Navy Personnel Command. NPC has administratively credited him with 42 retirement points during the anniversary year ending on 30 June 1950 and 15 points in the anniversary year ending 30
	June 1960. The advisory opinion also recommended that additional credit for the anniversary years ending in 1960, 1961 and 1970 be denied. However, it also states, in part, as follows:

Although there was no documentation in petitioner’s record to indicate drills were performed during 1949-1950, recommendation is being made in support of crediting enough drill points for each anniversary year ending 19 1, 1952 and 1953 to obtain a qualifying year toward retirement eligibility. Because member was advanced n rate and performed annual training during these periods, it appears member did perform drills.

e.	Attached to enclosure (1) is a Statement of Service for Navy Reserve Retirement. That statement shows no drills but 57 retirement poi ts in the anniversary year ending on 30 June 1950,
no drills and 9 points in the anniversary year ending on 30 June 1951, and no d ills and 30 points in the anniversary year ending on 30 June 195

CONCLUSION:

Upon review an consideration of all the evidence of record the Board conclude that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. The Board is aware that drill attendance reporting was very poor dun g the late 1940’s and early 1950’s. Given the passage of tim , the drill attendance cannot be documented. It is clear that e should have attempted to resolve this issue at an earlier dat . Since there is no documentation concerning drills in these cases, the Board normally would only credit an individual wit sufficient nonpay points to gain a qualifying year. Nonpay rills are appropriate because he would have been paid for any d ills actually performed at the time.

In this case, he year ending 20 June 1950 is already a qualifying yea , but he clearly was attending drills or he would not have received multiple active duty for training orders. Further, the r cord suggests that he was participating in the other two year at issue. Therefore, the Board agrees with the recommendation contained in the advisory opinion that nonpay drills should e credited. Given the circumstances, 20 nonpay drill points could be credited in the anniversary years ending on 30 June 195 and 1952 and 21 nonpay points in the anniversary year ending on 30 June 1951. The total number of nonpay drills to be credited is 61.

The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be file in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future. reviewers will understand the reasons for the change in the number of retirement points.

RECOMMENDAT ION

a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was credited wth 20 nonpay retirement points in the anniversary years ending o 30 June 1950 and 1952 and 21 nonpay retirement points in the anniversary year ending on 30 June 1951.

b. That this report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.

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. ZSALMAN	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder	Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant t 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 Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) and having ass red 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.

3