DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

HD: hd
Docket No: 02507-01
28 August 2001

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

You requested, in effect, removal of your failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 99
and 00 Naval Reserve Line Lieutenant Commander Selection Boards; that you be granted a
special selection board for FY 99; that your discharge of 31 March 2000 from the Naval
Reserve be set aside; that you be reinstated to the Inactive Status List 
lieutenant, with a date of rank adjustment to reflect seniority as if you had been placed on the
ISL on 1 June 1998; and that your 16 June 1995 completion of the Joint Maritime Operations
Course be filed in your record.

(ISL) in the grade of

Your request to file your completion of the Joint Maritime Operations Course was not
considered, as you have not exhausted your administrative remedies. You may ask the Navy
Personnel Command 

(NPC) to file this documentation.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 23 August 2001. 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 opinions furnished by NPC dated 11 and 25 June 2001, copies of
which are attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 9 August 2001.

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 your failure by the FY 99 Naval Reserve Line Lieutenant Commander
Selection Board should stand, and you should not receive consideration by a special selection
board for FY 99, as you did not exercise reasonable diligence to determine whether you
would be eligible for promotion consideration, and to ensure that the promotion board would
have your completion of the Joint Maritime Operations Course.
They noted that Secretary of
the Navy Instruction (SECNAVINST) 1401. 
lB, paragraph 6.b states  “A special selection
board will not be convened to consider any officer who, through the exercise of reasonable
diligence, might have discovered and corrected the error or omission in the official record
prior to convening the promotion selection board that considered, but did not select the
officer. 
”

- Inactive (ISL) status as a result of

The Board found your FY 00 failure should stand as well. In this regard, they noted that the
19 May 1999 Naval Reserve Officer Mobilization Disposition Board was approved on
26 July 1999, and that the FY 00 promotion board adjourned on 22 June 1999. Accordingly,
they found that even if you had been considered by the 19 May 1999 mobilization disposition
board, and you had been transferred to Standby Reserve
approval of a board recommendation, the transfer could not have occurred until after the
FY 00 promotion board had adjourned. This means you were properly in an active status
while the selection board was in session, so your failure of selection was valid in any event.
The Board further noted that as a result of review by the mobilization disposition board, you
could have been discharged, rather than transferred to inactive status. Finally, they found
nothing improper in your not having been screened between 31 May 1998 and 19 May 1999,
as no mobilization disposition board was scheduled during that period; screening by such a
board was then a prerequisite for transfer from an active status; and the applicable authorities
did not require annual screening boards, rather, SECNAVINST 
paragraph 12a stated  “The Secretary of the Navy shall, when necessary [emphasis added]
”
convene a board to screen Reserve officers. 

1920.6A, enclosure 

(3),

Since the Board found insufficient grounds to remove your failures of selection for promotion
selection board, they had no basis to set aside your discharge from the
or grant you a special
Naval Reserve.

In view of the above, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to 

all official

records. 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.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosures

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
MILLINGTON TN  
38055-0000

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

i.

542 0
PERS-911
11 Jun 01

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-OOZCB)

Subj:

Ref:

TS
R
I

(a) BCNR memo 5420
(b) COMNAVPERSCOM

PERS-OOZCB of   31 May 01
ltr 1920 PERS-911

of 1 Nov 99

Encl:

(1) BCNR File No. 02507-01

1 .

Per reference  

(a), enclosure  (1) is returned with the
:petition  be denied.
s two failures of selection

that
requ
e removed, his discharge be canceled and he be

considered for promotion before a Special Selection Board.

as commissioned a Naval officer on 31 May 1989
ve duty until 31 July 1996, at which time he

2.
and
was discharged from active duty and immediately signed a Naval
Reserve appointment.
9 October 1996 and served in that unit until 1 December 1996, at
which time he transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve
due to school conflict.
discharged on   31 March 2000 for having twice failed of selection
for promotion.

He affiliated with a Naval Reserve unit on

He remained in the IRR until he was

 

(IRR)

All members of the Ready Reserve,

regardless of level of participation.

including the Individual
are required by law to be considered by Promotion

3.
Ready Reserve,
Boards,
promotion boards are published by ALNAV message, as are the
results of the boards.
of non-selection.
responsibility to be aware of his s
promotion,
and to plan accordingly.
of the Ready Reserve since his separation from active duty and,
therefore,
was eligible for consideration by promotion boards.

It is ultimately the individual officer's

Officers are not individually notified

The zones for

igibility for
as a member

Subj:

S ICO EX-LT

as board deliberations are

He was correctly considered by the FY-99 and the FY-00 promotion
boards and failed on each occasion.
Specific reasons for his
non-selection are not available,
confidential in nature and records are not kept.
surmise that his record was not competitive when compared with
other eligible candidates when viewed within the numerical
constraints placed on selection boards.
of past boards,
Operations 
duty and was not in his record would have had little or no
impact on the Board's decision not to recommend selection. We
believe his lack of participation for the years immediately
preceding his consideration by promotion boards to be the main
reason for his non-selection.

n that the Joint Maritime
eportedly completed on active

tours

From our observations

We can only

if eligible,

Per Title 10, U.S. Code, Chapter 1407,

4.
at least twice failed of selection and has completed his
year military service obligation must transfer to the Retired
Reserve,
was
notified, per reference  
attrition provisions of law and, because he had not earned 20
years of qualifying service,
Naval Reserve was required by   31 March 2000.
provision of law or policy to waive this requirement.

(b), that he had become

his honorable discharge from the

or be discharged.

There is no

 

a lieutenant who has
eight-

subject to the

With regard to
5.
s not being screened for
participation, per
1200.15 and SECNAVINST  
the 50-point screening that he addresses in his petition, the
policy only applies to officers who have completed 20 or more
years of qualifying service and are eligible for a retirement.
Once an officer becomes eligible for retirement, he is required
to earn at least  
remain in an active status.
meet the criteria of this policy because he did not have 20
qualifying years of service.

50 retirement points each anniversar

Unfortunat

1920.6B,

SECNAVINST 

1920.6B  permits, but does not direct

For officers who have not yet reached retirement

6.
eligibility,
transfer of officers who do not meet a minimum participation
requirement of 27 points per anniversary
basis,
eight-year military service obligation and fail to earn 27
retirement points.
encumbered by the fact that we were required to place each

we screen the IRR for officers who have completed their

Until December 1999, this screening was

year.

 

On a routine

2

Subj :

S ICO EX

member before a Naval Reserve Officer Mobilization Disposition
Board before we could transfer a member from an active status.
This process normally took about four months of preparation
before the Board met,
conclusion of board action before transfer could be effected.

and another three to four months after

The 1997 Naval Reserve Mobilization

7.
convened in March 1997 was held befo
his military service obligation.
Mobilization Disposition Board due to the Bureau of Naval
Personnel's move to Memphis, TN.
1999, but did not include any lieutenants because the Lieutenant
Promotion Selection Board was scheduled to meet in June and we
do not attempt to cha
board.
As a result,
IRR to S-2 status.

's status during a promotion
as not transferred from the

The next Board was held in May

oard that
ompleted

In

conduct a

We find no error or injustice in this case.

separation from
He was properly considered for promotion

8.
was a member of the Ready Reserve since his
active duty in 1996.
by the FY-99 and FY-00 Promotion Selection Boards and failed on
both occasions.
He made a career decision in 1996 to stop
participating in the Naval Reserve and pursue a law degree.
Consequently,
honorable discharge from the Naval Reserve.
favorable reply is not possible in this case.
questions concerning this matter,
PERS-91B,  at (901) 874-4482.

he twice failed of selection requiring his

please contact this office,

If you have

We regret a more

Director,
Administration Division

Naval Reserve Personnel

3

!

DEPARTMENT OF

( 
  THE NAVY-

NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE

.:;:I

5420
PERS-86

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Via:

Assistant for BCNR Matters (PERS-OOZCB)

Subj:

Ref:

REQUEST FOR C
EX-LIEUTENANT

(a) BCNR memo 5420 PERS-OOZCB of 31 May 01
(b) SECNAV Instruction  

1401.1B

Encl:

(1) BCNR File 02507-01 w/Service Record

1.
Per reference
recommendation tha
requesti

s 

(1) is returned with the
s petition is denied.
lures of select be removed,

EX-LT

assignment to a special selection board and his discharge be
canceled.

t

documents were
record was
e are no grounds

Therefore,

ecord  which went before

However, his

An examination 0

was conducted and the Joint

fitreps  as well as al
It is our opinion tha

2.
the FY-00 LCDR selection
Maritime Operations correspondence course was not present in his
record as he pointed out in his petition.
detaching 
present.
substantially complete before
for a special board based on material error of fact or material
administrative error as outlined in reference (b).
since his record was substantially complete a special selection
board is not warranted.
reference 
periodically to ensure their records are complete and accurate.
An officer's request for a special selection board must detail
the steps the officer took to ensure the completeness and
accuracy of the official record prior to the convening date of
the board which
It is our opinion th
diligence in the rev
placement in the individual ready reserve rather than on the
inactive status list as he outlined in his petition.

(b) officers have a duty to review their records

ailed to select the officer.

Additionally,

in accordance with

not exercise reasonable
record which led to his

conside

etition he asked for a special selection
a matter of record that he was not
eligible for the FY-98 selection board because he was not in
zone for promotion in that fiscal year.
he failed of selection in FY-99 and FY-00 and would be eligible
for special selection boards only in the years where he was
eligible for promotion.

As a matter of record

Additionally

equested a removal of the fail

4.
of select for FY-98.
As stated above he was not eligible for
the FY-98 LCDR promotion selection board, and no fail of select
exists for that fiscal year,
requested in his petition.
for FY-99 and FY-00 and we concur with the opinion rendered by
PERS-9, that his record was not competitive when compared with
other eligible candidates when viewed within the numerical
constraints placed on the selection board.
PERS-9 that these fails of select should remain.

therefore it cannot be removed as
fails of select do exist

However,

We also concur with

5.
EX-Lieutenan
his record and ye
his petition does not detract from his
nation and the United States Navy.

can be justifiably proud of
ons; the negative response to

ice to this

Promotions,
Appointments, and
Enlisted Advancement Division