DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
	     BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
			        2 NAVY ANNEX
					WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 

										   TRG
Docket No: 8589-06
19 January 2006

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

Subj:	REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 

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

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

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting early retirement under the provisions of the Reserve Transition Benefits (RTB) program., designation as a master training specialist and the award of the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal.

	2. The Board, consisting of Ms.	, Ms.’ and Ms. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 9 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 within the Department of the Navy.

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

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 18 June 1989 at age 42. At that time, he was credited with almost four years of active service in a prior enlistment. He then earned 12 consecutive qualifying years for reserve retirement purposes.

d.	On 22 May 2001, the Navy Personnel Command informed Petitioner’s commanding officer that the Bureau of Medicine and. Surgery had found him not physically qualified (NPQ) for retention in the Naval Reserve. The command was to inform him of
his options, which included reserve retirement under the provisions of the RTB program if he had 15 years of qualifying service. Subsequently, Petitioner was transferred to a nonpay status and remained there until he was honorably discharged on 7 June 2003 at the expiration of his enlistment. Petitioner became 60 years of age on 39 August 2006.

e.	Attached to enclosure (1) is an advisory opinion from the Navy Personnel Command that states, in part, as follows:

...	(Petitioner’s) request for awarding of master training specialist should be referred to the Command Navy Reserve Forces Command, as the qualification authority, for an opinion.

Upon being found NPQ, (Petitioner) should have been offered the opportunity to request early retirement under the provisions of the Reserve Transition Benefits (RTB) program .... Instead he remained in the Selected Reserve until he was discharged at his expiration of obligation service on 7 January 2003.

Due to the error in processing, we support (his) request for relief. Recommend his record be changed to reflect he was not discharge but authorized an early retirement (without pay) with the effective day of 7 June 2003. He will receive benefits at age 60      

f.	The Board is aware that the Uniform Retirement Date Act, 5 U.S.C 8301, requires that the effective day of a retirement be the first day of the month.

g.	Petitioner is also requesting the award of the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal and designation as a Master Training Specialist. However, there is no documentation in the record to show that he was ever recommended for either the award or the designation. Further given the passage of time, there are probably no records remaining at the local level concerning this matter.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. Given the circumstances and the recommendation contained in the advisory opinion, the Board concludes that Petitioner should be transferred to the Retired Reserve under the provisions of the RTB program effective on 1 June 2003. Since he is now 60 years old, the record should be further corrected to show that he transferred to the Retired List on 28 August 2006, his. 60th birthday.

In the absence of documentation from his command concerning his request for the award of the Navy and Marine Corps and designation as a Master Training Specialist, there is no justification for the Board to take favorable action on those requests.

The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand his status on the Retired List of the Naval Reserve.

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 1 June 2003 he transferred to the Retired Reserve.

b. That Petitioner’s record be further corrected to show that he transferred to the Retired List on 28 August 1946, his 60th birthday.

c. That no further relief be granted.

d. 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 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 Regulations, 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.

ROBERT D.ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director