DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100

BJG
Docket No: 8342-06
12 April 2007

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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 opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 25 October 2006 with enclosures and 2 November 2006, copies of which are attached.

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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions, except it did not consider the recommendations, in the opinion dated 25 October 2006, for corrective action, as you did not request them, and they do not require action by the Board. The Board found your selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 or 2007 Reserve Major Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your Career Retirement Credit Report had been correct. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove either of your failures of selection by the FY 2006 and 2007 Reserve Major Selection Boards, it had no grounds to set aside your discharge from the Marine Corps Reserve on 1 November 2006. 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,

Enclosures

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
	                                                    QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5 103

IN REPLY REFER TO:
										   1600 CMT
									        OCT 2 2006

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

Subj:	RESERVE AFFAIR$ DIVISION ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION; CASE 0
	Ref:	(a)	DD Form 149 dtd 13 Sep 06
		(b)	BCNR request for advisory opinion of 10 Oct 06
		(c)	Telephone conversation on 17 Oct 06 with MMPR
			representative

DD-214s, and CRCR

1.	Per reference (a) and (b), we have reviewed4U~rnUIIhI~~Mj request for the removal of his failures of selection to Major while in the Marine Corps Reserve. ~ he was passed for selection on two occasions due to errors on his Career Retirement Credit Report.

2. Upon review o~~IjhUh	~ record, we determined that he was considered for promotion and not selected by the FY06 and FY07 Reserve Major Promotion Board. He was considered in zone dunn the FY06 board and above zone by the FY07 board.
‘record does have several errors, which are identified below. These errors do not appear to be the reason for his nonselection.

3.	It appears ~ DD-214s reflect incorrect information which has been used to produce other documents in his record, such as his Career Retirement Credit Report (CRCR). These errors include an overstatement of his total amount of active duty and incorrect social security number. We recommend that his DD-214s and CRCR be reviewed and corrected. It also appears that he was credited with several years of active duty that he did not serve. This overstatement of active duty contributed to what we believe to be an overpayment of his separation pay in 2004. We recommend that the appropriate agency recalculate this amount and take the appropriate action to recoup
Subj:	RESERVE AFFAIRS DIVISION ADV S Q ION,. ON CNR APPLICATIO

any overpayment. Furthermore, it is the sole responsibility of the individual Marine to ensure that their records reflect accurate and correct information.

4. Per reference (c), the promotion board considers the Marine’s entire record, not just one or two documents. The Promotion Branch states that the CRCR is not used to determine the eligibility of officers. Therefore,4~~~UjEUU~llegation that his incorrec~ CRCR led to his ineligibility is not accurate.
~~UUMUMfhU~ his Master Brief Sheet contains two adverse fitness reports and five other reports that are marked below the reporting senior’s average. These reports also have very low reviewing officer’s marks. One of the adverse reports is due to poor performance, specifically his inability to effectively lead subordinates. The second adverse report addresses issues that I nvyly~ possible officer misconduct; specifically, that - ornrnitted bigamy. Due to these performance issues and misconduct during his career, one can speculate that these are the reasons he was not selected for promotion.

5. Based on current law, specifically Title 10, U.S. Code,
Sections 14505 and 14513, he will be involuntarily separated on 1
November 2006. We do not concur with his request and regrettably
cannot act on his desire to further serve in the Marine Corps
Reserve.

~4a1{~/
R.	F. LARSEN
By direction
Of the Marine Corps