Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05874-07
Original file (05874-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100


 LCC
 Docket No. 5874-07
28 Aug 07




This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2007. 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 opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 13 August 2007, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, 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 also 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.
         
                  W.       DEAN PFIEFFER
         Enclosure        Executive Director












DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
HARRY LEE HALL, 17 LEJEUNE ROAD
        QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 221 34-5104 

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1 4 00/3
         MMPR-2
          13 AUG 2007
MEM0 RAN D U M FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF

Ref:     (a) BCNR Docket Number 05874-07 of 24 Jul 07
 (b)      NAVMC 118(5) from SNM’s service record book
(c)      MCO P1400.29 (ENLPROMMAN)
1.       Per reference (a), asserts he should have been promoted to the rank of staff sergeant based on passing the general military subjects test (GMST) on 8 January 1952.
2.       Reference (b) verifies ~ the general military subjects test (GMST) for promotion to staff sergeant on 8 January 1952. Paragraph 3010.3a of reference (c) states the following must be achieved prior to promotion to staff sergeant.
(1)      Complete the minimum service in grade requirement as established by the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
(2)      Pass an appropriate GMST.
(3)      Have a composite score equal to or above the minimum established for his occupational field.
(4)      Be otherwise qualified as determined by his commander.
3.       Based on the information above, passing the GMST is only one of the qualifying factors for a Marine to be promoted to the rank of staff sergeant. Additionally, reference (b) shows was promoted to sergeant on 1 April 1951, the last rank he1d in the United States Marine Corps. The time in grade requirement for a sergeant to be eligible for promotion to staff sergeant was one year. Furthermore, had his composite score met or exceeded the composite score for occupational field 2600 for any eligible promotion periods and he had been recommended for promotion by his commander, would have qualified for promotion to staff sergeant.
         4.       Based on the foregoing, it is recommended record remain
         unchanged at this time.

                           Major, U. S. Corps
 Head, Enlisted Promotion Section

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05759-07

    Original file (05759-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Based on the information above, passing the GMST is only one of the qualifying factors for a Marine to be promoted to the rank of staff sergeant. Furthermore, reference (b) also verifies that became qualified for promotion to staff sergeant on 28 December 1954.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03939-01

    Original file (03939-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, considered your application on 14 May 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Consequently, on the applicant to when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is demonstrate the existence of probable material error or upon submission of new and material In this regard, it is important ili_justice. , a former...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00186-01

    Original file (00186-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. for promotion but he was not awarded the promotion. He states that he passed a quests that his rank of lance corporal be "GMST" test A review of ‘GMST test" for promotion to corporal.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00433-07

    Original file (00433-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 opinion furnished by MC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2, 13 February 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09007-07

    Original file (09007-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 material error or injustice. 2 The record of examination for promotion section of reference (b) show no evidence tha qian 2s sed any military...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02755-09

    Original file (02755-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2009. 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. Reference (d) states the requirements for promotion to the rank of corporal were as follows: (1) Complete the minimum time in grade/time in service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00688-06

    Original file (00688-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. 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 | CY2006 | 06319-06

    Original file (06319-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1400/3 l’II4PR-2, 30 August 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10290-08

    Original file (10290-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The front page of his fitness report for 18 March to 25 July 2008, a copy of which is at Tab B, verifies he had a first class PFT score of 205. d. In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps Enlisted Promotion Section commented to the effect Petitioner’s request should be denied, as he “chose not to take his PFT making him unqualified for extension or reenlistment.” e. Enclosure (3) is Petitioner’s reply to enclosure (2), detailing the circumstances that prevented him from taking...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01498-09

    Original file (01498-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    01498-09 25 August 2009 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USc 1552, A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2009. 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...