Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09438-06
Original file (09438-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
                  DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 BJG
 Docket No: 9438-06
 4 January 2 00 7
From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
                   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
         Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
          End:     (1) DD Form 149 dtd 18 Oct 06 w/encls
 (2)      Memo for record dtd 3 Jan 07
(3)      Subject’s ltr dtd 2 Nov 06 w/encls
(4)      HQMC CMT memo dtd 7 Dec 06
(5)      Subject’s naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing his failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 and 2007 Reserve Major Selection Boards~ so he will be eligible for current reappointment as an officer in the Marine Corps Reserve. By enclosure (2), he requested that the reason for his discharge on 1 November 2006 be changed from failures of selection for promotion to resignation.
2.       The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bourgeois, Grover and Hess, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 4 January 2007, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken of 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 contends his non-participation in reserve activities before September 2006 should not preclude his continued service, as excluding him is unfair to him and not in the interest of the Marine Corps.
         c.       By correspondence at enclosure (3), Petitioner provided documentation for the Headquarters Marine Corps Career Management Team (CMT).
d.       In enclosure (4), CMT recommends removing only one of Petitioner’s failures of selection for promotion, which is enough to make him eligible for current reappointment. They state that Petitioner should be reappointed for continued affiliation with the 4th Civil Affairs Group in order to deploy with them in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. They note that Marines reappointed must have one year of service before promotion consideration.
CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (4), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following limited corrective action.

R ECOM MENDAT ION:

 a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show he did not fail of selection by the FY 2007 Reserve Major Selection Board, so his record will reflect he has failed of selection to major only once.
b.       That his record be corrected further to show the reason for his discharge from the Marine Corps Reserve on 1 November 2006 was resignation rather than failures of selection for promotion.
c.       That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board’s recommendation be corrected, removed or completely expunged from Petitioner’s record and that no such entries or material be added to the record in the future.
d.       That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner’s naval record be returned to the Board, together with a copy of this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of Petitioner’s naval record.
e.       That the remainder of Petitioner’s request be denied.
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) 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        JONATHAN S. RUSKIN
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.

         W. DEAN P EIFFER
 Executive Director

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1600
         CMT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Subj: RESERVE AFFAIRS DIVISION ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR
        
         Ref:     (a)      DD Form 149 of 18 Oct 06
                  (b)      MMER req advisory opinion of 07 Nov 06
1. Per references (a) and (b), we have reviewed request for the removal of his failures of selection (FOS) to the rank of Major and reappointment into the Marine Reserves. On November 1, 2006 as discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve after receiving his second failure for selection to the next higher grade. His failure of selection most likely was the unsatisfactory participation in the Marine Reserves during the last several years.

         2.       After review in record, we recommend the removal of one FOS. Furthermore, at the request of both 4 th Civil Affairs Group and he should be reappointed to the Marine Corps Reserve for continued affiliation with the 4 th Civil Affairs Group in order to deploy with them in support of
          Operation Iraqi Freedom. This will allow o prepare for his next eligible promotion on the Reserve Major Promotion Selection Board. Marines that have been reappointed per U.S.
Code, Title 10, section 14301, must have one year of service prior to being eligible for promotion.

3. Point of contact at Reserve Affairs is Second Lieutenant Arturo Nagy at commercial (703)784-0523 or DSN 278-0523.


By direction

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08063-06

    Original file (08063-06.rtf) 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 naval record be corrected by removing his failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 1994 and 1995 Reserve Major Selection Boards, so he will be eligible for current reappointment as. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Cooper, McBride and Schultz, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 16 November 2006, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03345-03

    Original file (03345-03.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 the applicable naval record be corrected by removing her failures of selection before the Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 and 1998 Reserve Captain Selection Boards. Gilbert and Nofziger and Mr. Grover, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 September 2003, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10443-02

    Original file (10443-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (4), the HQMC Career Management Team (CMT), the office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner her failures of selection for promotion, has commented to the effect that this request would warrant approval if the entire fitness report in question were to be removed. Chairperson, Performance Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02171-06

    Original file (02171-06.rtf) 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 naval record be corrected by removing his failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2002 through 2006 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards and restoring his status as a major in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR). Finally, they noted that officers removed from the 15Th must have one year in an active status before...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05822-01

    Original file (05822-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    d. Enclosure (4) is the advisory opinion from the HQMC Career Management Team (CMT) recommending denial of Petitioner ’s request to remove his failure of selection before the FY 2002 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. [Petitioner ’s] overall record is less than competitive when compared with his peers. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has Date of Report Reporting...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02108-06

    Original file (02108-06.rtf) 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 the applicable naval record be corrected to show the lineal position, date of rank, and effective date in the grade of colonel he would have been assigned had he been selected for promotion to that grade by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 Reserve Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY 2007 Reserve Colonel Selection Board. Enclosure (5)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04895-07

    Original file (04895-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BUG Docket No: 4895-07 21 November 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: os a REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07688-02

    Original file (07688-02.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 the applicable naval record be corrected that to show that he did not fail of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2002 Active Reserve Major Selection Board. The Board, consisting of Messrs. McBride, allegations of error and injustice on 7 November 2002, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09932-09

    Original file (09932-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    These requests were denied on 2 September 2004. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion from the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Career Management Team (CMT), dated 24 July 2008 with enclosures, and the reports of the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 September 2008 and 8 September 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03139-06

    Original file (03139-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You further requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Active Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, on the basis that your record, as it was presented to that promotion board, included the contested original report, it did not include the revised report, and you allege it reflected identical RO marks and comments in the fitness reports for 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004 and 1 July to 20 December 2004. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted...