DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
LCC:lc
Docket
2 October 2001
No.4136-01
From:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:
Secretary of the Navy
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
DD Form 149 w/attachments
CMC memorandum 1000, MMEA of 24 August 2001
Appendix C, Marine Corps Enlisted Career Planning and
Retention Manual
Petitioner's Microfiche
.
Ref:
Encl:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
.
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), subject,
1 .
hereinafter, referred to as Petitioner,
this Board requesting, in effect,
record be corrected to show he was entitled to full separation
pay when he was discharged from the Marine Corps on
21 November 2000.
that the applicable naval
filed enclosure (1) with
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Geisler, Harrison, and
2.
Rothlein reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 25 September 2001 and,
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record.
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes,
pursuant to its regulations, determined
Documentary material considered by
regulations and policies.
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
3.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and justice, finds as
follows:
a.
Petitioner was discharged from the Marine Corps on
21 November 2000.
which indicates he was voluntary discharged.
maintains his discharge was involuntary and therefore he should
be paid full separation pay.
His DD Form 214 has a separation designator
Petitioner
b .
Petitioner asserts that his request to reenlist was not
processed properly by his command or Headquarters CMC, MMEA-6.
The record shows that his request to reenlist was first submitted
on 16 March 2000 with insufficient information.
could not make a decision on the request without the additional
Headquarters CMC
Docket No. 4136-01
data and on 18 March 2000,
additional data.
that Petitioner had withdrawn his request.
MMEA-6 formally requested the
MMEA-6 was then advised by Petitioner's command
C .
Petitioner submitted a second request for reenlistment on
5 April 2000.
sufficient data to enable MMEA-6 to make a determination on
Petitioner's eligibility to reenlist.
Again, the request was submitted without
d.
MMEA-6 again requested the information that it felt it
MMEA-6 received this information on 30 November 2000,
needed.
7 months after submission and 9 days after Petitioner had been
discharged.
did not process the request.
unit by MMEA-6 were documents pertaining to a driving under the
influence (DUI) offense which had occurred during Petitioner's
last enlistment.
Because the request was overtaken by events MMEA-6
The information requested from the
e.
When Petitioner's unit discharged him it indicated on his
DD Form 214, Report of Separation, that he was voluntarily
discharged.
f.
g*
Petitioner responds that with over 11 years honorable
service, he would not voluntarily take a discharge.
In correspondence attached as enclosure
(2), the office
having cognizance over the subject matter involved
Petitioner's application,
request does not have merit.
Petitioner had truly wanted to reenlist he would have extended
his enlistment until MMEA-6 made a decision on his request to
reenlist.
in.
CMC's position is that if
has commented to the effect that the
CONCLUSION:
(2), the
In this connection, the Board finds that
made a request to reenlist and it had been submitted
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
notwithstanding the comments contained in enclosure
Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the
requested relief.
Petitioner
with enough lead time so that the processing should have been
completed.
The second request was submitted on 5 April 2000,
which was approximately 7
l/2 months prior to his discharge.
unit had ample time to submit the documents required by MMEA-6 to
being discharged but did
process the request prior to Petitioner
not do so.. MMEA-6 also failed to put a suspense action on the
request so that after a reasonable period of time it could
Furthermore, experience has shown that when a
follow up.
Marine's contract is up CMC does not issue extensions while it
Additionally
decides whether or not to allow reenlistment.
individual Marine commands have also refused to submit requests
The
Docket No. 4136-01
In accordance with Appendix C, enclosure
for extensions for individuals in situations similar to
Petitioner/s.
the Marine Corps Enlisted Career Planning and Retention Manual
Petitioner is entitled to one half separation.
DUI entry in his records, and marks of
report, for the period 1 October 1998 through 31 March 1999.
According to Appendix C anyone with marks of
"C" and is
involuntarily discharged is entitled to one half.separation pay.
"C" on a fitness
"B" and
"B" or
(3), to
Petitioner had a
Accordingly, the Board recommends the following corrective
action.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropriate,
to show that:
a.
Petitioner was authorized payment of one half separation
pay when he was discharged from the Marine Corps on 21 November
2001.
is non-retention on active duty, vice
of required active duty.
Petitioner was assigned a separation code of
"JGH2", which
"KBKl", which is completion
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
and that the foregoing is a true and
review and deliberations,
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above-entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
G. L. ADAMS
Acting Recorder
The foregoing action of the -Board is submitted for your
5.
review and action.
Reviewed and approved:
NOV 2
8 2001
\
JOSEPH G.
Assistant
LYMCH
Genetat Counset
(Manpower And Reserve Affairs)
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11627-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 LCC Docket No. The Board, consisting of Messrs. George, Pfeiffer, and Zsalman reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 26 October 2009 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03167-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. time from 22 December 2000 until 19 January 2001. for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01387-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 MEH:ddj Docket No: 1387-01 17 April 2001 From: To: Subj : Ref: Encl: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) (1) (2) (3) Title 10 U.S.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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06249-00
The promotion would have been effective 1 May 1998: however, the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC), deleted his name from the selection list on 15 April 1998. Board concluded this Marine's record was outstanding enough to influence and convince CMC, MMEA-85 to waive the alcohol related Petitioner incident of 6 December 1997 and approve the waiver. Accordingly, the Board recommends the following corrective _- action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09357-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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. 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 | CY2002 | 03805-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. 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. and SNM opted not to pursue the 48 month reenlistment at the SNM executed the 24 month For Further Observation authority, Instead, has served 19...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01964-00
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Control (ECFC) policy, According to the Enlisted Career Force sergeants who have twice failed selection to the next higher grade must leave active duty at he end of active service sergeant twice and was therefore denied further service. in order...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08003-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2001. 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. P1900.16E, Marine Corps Separations MC0 if a Marine does not meet all reenlistment we recommend the Board for correction of Naval Records Additionally, unqualified Per 5.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00004-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2001. 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. The actual reenlistment request for 36 months supports these documents as well.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06191-01
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 by removing the fitness report for 15 March to 14 August 2000, a copy of which is at enclosure (1). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be...