Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06743-06
Original file (06743-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                      WASHINGTON DC 20370 - 5100

                                                                                          TRG
 Docket No: 6743-06
2 February 2007
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, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting that 17 months of time in grade earned in a previous enlistment be added to his current time in grade.
2.       The Board, consisting of Ms. 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.       Petitioner’s application was filed in a timely manner.
c.       Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 15 May 1995 at age 20. He then served in an excellent manner for several years and was promoted to corporal (CPL; E-4). On 7 April 1998 he had surgery on his right knee. He was unable to recover from the surgery and could not complete the run portion of the physical fitness test. Because of his inability to run, he was not promoted to sergeant (SGT; E-5). On 15 October 1999 he was honorably discharged by reason of physical disability with severance pay and was assigned an RE-3P reenlistment code. The DD Form 214 indicates that the effective date of his promotion to CPL was 1 May 1998.








                 







                  d. A report from a Department of Veterans Affairs doctor, dated 27 January 2006, states that Petitioner was experiencing incapacitating knee pain. Therefore, exploratory surgery was conducted. The surgery revealed that the pain resulted from a mass of scar tissue surrounding suture material which had been left in the knee at the time of his first surgery in April 1998. The doctor stated that Petitioner had an excellent result, was pain free and stable, and was running four miles a day without pain or instability.
e.       Petitioner then immediately attempted to reenlist in the~ Marine Corps. On 28 February 2006, the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery recommended a waiver of the physical standards. He reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 22 March 2006 at age 31 in the grade of CPL with a date of rank as of the date of reenlistment. He was apparently able to accomplish this reenlistment in such a short period of time because he received assistance from Marines with whom he had previously served.
f.       With his application Petitioner has submitted several excellent character references, one of which is from a master gunnery sergeant, the Public Affairs Chief of the Marine Corps, who enthusiastically endorses Petitioner’s request to regain the time in grade he lost as corporal upon his medical discharge. On 11 October 2006, he was the distinguished honor graduate of the Basic Public Affairs Specialist Writers Course, and has also received several meritorious masts.
CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. Concerning his request to grant him the 17 months time in grade he previously earned as a CPL, the Board believed that favorable action was certainly reasonable. It is clear that with the extra 17 months time in grade, he would immediately be promoted to SGT, a grade he would have held except for the botched surgery in April 1998. He could then most likely make a persuasive case that the Board should backdate that promotion to the date of reenlistment.

Given the circumstances, the Board concludes that the most appropriate action is to correct the record to show that Petitioner reenlisted on 22 March 2006 in the grade of SGT with a date of rank as of the date of reenlistment.

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







2




 RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 22 March 2006 he reenlisted in the Marine Corps in the grade of SGT with a date of rank of that date.

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 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.

























3

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600604

    Original file (MD0600604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Period of Limited Duty: 8 months. Follow up: as needed.Final Disposition: PT is found FFD w/the following limitations – partial PT only, no running – no forced marches. Bilateral knee joint pain in the patellofemoral region, worse while walking, while running, while jumping, started gradually, occurs at rest, worse on rising from a seated position, knee joint stiffness, and a grating sensation I the knee but no knee joint swelling, able to straighten the knee, and the knee did not suddenly...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10024-07

    Original file (10024-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, applied to this Board requesting that his discharge be upgraded. His last act of misconduct which resulted in his receiving an undesirable discharge (UD) occurred on 14 september 1954 when he was convicted by civil authorities of being a “peeping tom.” CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that as a matter clemency Petitioner’s request for an upgrade of his UD should be granted. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05732-01

    Original file (05732-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 12 April 2000, the PEB made preliminary findings that he was unfit for duty because of chondromalacia findings on 21 April 2000, and apparently was advised that he would be discharged patella, right knee, which it rated at 10% disabling. ’s record be ’s It did not effect the corrective e. After being advised of the denial of his initial application, Petitioner submitted his present application, in which he contended that his release from active duty was erroneous, and that his record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05410-06

    Original file (05410-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by changing his reentry code issued on 29 April 2002, 2. However, he was not allowed to reenlist in the Marine Corps Reserve at the expiration of his enlistment due to his RE-4 reentry code. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 29 April 2002, he was assigned an RE-3C reentry code.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05275-06

    Original file (05275-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by restoring him to the rank of sergeant (SGT; E-5).2 The Board, consisting of Messrsreviewed Petitioners allegations of injustice on16 August 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. They stated that Petitioner was assigned...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00938

    Original file (MD03-00938.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00938 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030430. The Petitioner never at any time ‘just left” California or his responsibilities with the Marine Corps Reserves. Based upon the above, the Petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable Board set aside said administrative discharge, correct petitioner’s DD-214 to reflect a discharge characterization of Honorable, reflect a separation code of FND (unqualified resignation) and a reenlistment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00502-99

    Original file (00502-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his record be corrected to show that he was discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve (USMCR) for a reason other than being found not physically qualified for further service, o that he may reenlist in the USMCR. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bartlett, Ensley and ~chultz, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08054-01

    Original file (08054-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In his application, Petitioner contends that it was unfair to impose NJP for the four day period of UA because bailed myself out and would have if I knew I was going to be charged..." He points out the statement of the SSGT to the effect that he would be placed on leave and states that this individual was unavailable during the NJP process. together with a copy of Caron cannot go along with the recommendation of the majority d. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04764-01

    Original file (04764-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The command investigation recommended that CAPT 0 be the subject of a non-punitive letter of caution since he knew or reasonably should have known that the public horseplay occurring in his platoon could develop into hazing. k. In his application, Petitioner contends that although three Further, there is no Marines received NJP for the incident at issue, one of these Marines was not reduced in rank. Lastly, the opinion noted that Petitioner indistinguisable; the By Petitioner's own did,not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01067

    Original file (MD04-01067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01067 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040616. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition.