DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 800-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (b) MCO 6100.13 W/CH 2 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/enclosures (2) HQMC memo 1000 RAP (undated) 1. Pursuant to reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his record be corrected to reflect that, in December 2017, he was in a “temporary not physically qualified” (TNPQ) status, and thus only required to complete a partial combat fitness test (movement to contact (MTC) portion), and to determine that he be reenlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 26 February 2020 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, relevant portions of Petitioner’s 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, found as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy. b. Pursuant to reference (b), when a Marine is unable to complete a physical fitness test (PFT) or combat fitness test (CFT) due to an underlying physical or medical condition, an evaluation by an appropriately privileged health care provider (APHCP) must be conducted. The APHCP will make a medical status determination regarding the Marine’s ability to complete the PFT or CFT, or partial PFT or CFT, or if referral to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)/Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) is warranted. A medical determination is required to excuse a Marine from participating in a particular event or an entire test. Marines assigned to a light or limited duty status are not exempt from the PFT/CFT requirement and are still required to perform those events not affected by the condition, unless otherwise specified by the APHCP. c. On 19 June 2017, Petitioner injured his back and was put in a limited-duty status. Petitioner was medically waived from his annual PFT requirement due to his limited-duty status. In August 2017, Petitioner injured his left hand. His orthopedic doctor recommended no physical training that involved his left hand, for a period of four weeks. On 4 December 2017, Petitioner was again treated for his hand injury, and his orthopedic doctor recommend that he restrict weight bearing or gripping of his left hand, and perform no push-ups for a period of eight weeks, until 28 January 2018. According to the Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS), his limited-duty status expired on 22 December 2017. d. On 28 December 2017, Petitioner was purportedly advised by his career planner that he was not able to reenlist in the Marine Corps Reserve while on light duty, and that he must complete his PFT and CFT prior to determination of his reenlistment request. e. On 29 December 2017, Petitioner completed the MTC portion of a partial CFT. However, Petitioner’s career planner did not submit Petitioner’s Reserve Reenlistment Extension Lateral Move (RELM) request to Headquarters, Marine Corps for reenlistment determination. f. On 19 March 2018, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Reserve Staff Noncommissioned Officer (SNCO) Promotion Selection Board convened. Petitioner failed selection for the second time. On 10 April 2018, Petitioner was notified that he would be involuntarily transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) due to his second failure of selection. g. On 5 July 2018, at the expiration of his contract, Petitioner was permanently separated. Petitioner had completed a total of 19 satisfactory anniversary years (20 satisfactory anniversary years are require to qualify for retirement). Additionally, he had earned 33 of 50 points from the beginning of his 20th anniversary year on 5 March 2018 until his separation on 5 July 2018. h. Petitioner asserts that, in preparation for the FY 2018 Reserve SNCO Promotion Selection Board, he requested a counseling with the Reserve career counselor, and, although he was told his record was “extremely competitive,” he was advised to run a partial CFT to ensure he would be more competitive for the promotion board. Petitioner also asserts that, during his second counseling with the Reserve career counselor, he was advised that all items on his reenlistment checklist were complete and that his package was good for submission. i. Petitioner contends that the reason he incurred a second failure of selection was due to incorrect PCFT data that was entered into the MCTFS, making it appear as though he failed his CFT. He further contends that, due to his second failure of selection as well as his limited-duty status, he was involuntarily transferred to the IRR and unable to reenlist, which prevented him from completing his 20th satisfactory anniversary year and qualifying for a Reserve retirement. j. An advisory opinion (AO) at enclosure (2), furnished by Headquarters, Marine Corps (RAP), recommends that Petitioner’s request be approved. RAP determined that Petitioner had demonstrated intent to continue serving in the Marine Corps Reserve when he contacted his career planner on 28 December 2017. The AO determined that, although Petitioner was not able to reenlist, due to his light-duty status, the career planner should have submitted a Reserve RELM request to RA for final determination. RA determined that, had they received a RELM request for Petitioner, Headquarters, Marine Corps could have extended Petitioner’s contract to allow him time to become fit for full duty to conduct his PFT and CFT. Considering that Petitioner was not afforded the opportunity to extend his contract, RAP recommends that the BCNR reinstate Petitioner into the Marine Corps Reserve IRR. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the AO, the Board determined that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. The Board, however, determined that Petitioner’s contention that his PCFT was improperly entered into the MCTFS, and that his second failure of selection for promotion was due to incorrect PCFT data in the MCFTS is speculative. The Board thus concluded that this contention lacks merit, and that Petitioner’s record shall not be corrected based on his contentions. However, the Board noted that Petitioner attempted to reenlist, but due to his limited-duty status, his career planner failed to submit his RELM request to Headquarters, Marine Corps for final disposition. The Board determined that, had it been properly submitted, Headquarters, Marine Corps would have granted an extension of enlistment, allowing Petitioner to complete his 20th anniversary year ending 4 March 2019, and he would not have been discharged on 5 July 2018. The Board noted that, from the beginning of his 20th anniversary year, on 5 March 2018 until his discharge on 5 July 2018, Petitioner was credited 33 points towards a satisfactory year (12 active-duty points, and 21 inactive-duty points), falling 17 points short of a satisfactory 20th anniversary year. In determining what rightful relief should be granted, the Board considered reinstating Petitioner in the Marine Corps Reserve for a period that would allow him enough time to complete a satisfactory anniversary year. Although recommended by Headquarters, Marine Corps, the Board determined that reinstating Petitioner in the Marine Corps Reserve now, almost two years after his discharge in July 2018, and especially considering his questionable physical qualifications for reinstatement, this course of action was not warranted. Instead, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s record shall be corrected to reflect the he was not discharged on 5 July 2018, but served continuously until 4 March 2019. His record shall also reflect that he completed a satisfactory anniversary year from 5 March 2018 to 4 March 2019, by awarding 17 inactive-duty points in addition to the 33 points he had already earned for that year. The Board also concluded that Petitioner’s record shall reflect that he retired in the Marine Corps Reserve upon completion of his 20th satisfactory anniversary year. RECOMMENDATION In view of the above, the Board recommends the following corrective action. Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to reflect that he was not discharged on 5 July 2018, but served continuously in the IRR until 4 March 2019. Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to reflect that he completed a satisfactory anniversaryyear from 5 March 2018 to 4 March 2019, by awarding 17 inactive-duty points in addition to the 33 points he had already earned for that year. Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to reflect that he retired in the Marine Corps Reserve upon completion of his 20th satisfactory anniversary year. 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 no such entries or material be added to the record in the future. This includes, but is not limited to, all information systems or database entries that reference or discuss the expunged material, failures of selection, and involuntary separation. That no further relief be granted. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a trueand complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 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.