Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00713-99
Original file (00713-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
D E P A R T M E N T  O F  T H E  N A V Y  
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 

2 NAVY ANNEX 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

JLP:ddj 
Docket No:  713-99 
13 April  1999 

Dear 

b 

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  13 April  1999.  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  MARINE CORPS RECRUITING CMD memorandum  1400/1 RE-21 of  24 
March  1999, a copy of  which is 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 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 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, 

W.  DEAN PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 

Enclosure 

UNITED STATES  MARINE CORPS 
MARINE CORPS RECRUITING COMMAND 

3 2 8 0 R U S S E L L R O A D  

QUANTlCO VA  2 2  134-5 103 

14 O)IEPLY 

REFER TO 

RE-21 
24 Mar 99 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION 

OF NAVAL RECORDS 

Ref:  (a) BCNR Docket #713-99 

(b) MCO P1100.72 

1.  In response to reference (a), we have reviewed 
petition, OMPF, and the provisions of 

Based on our review, we recommend that his petition for date of 
rank adjustment be disapproved. 

2.  Table 4-2 Rule 6 of reference (b) states that you must have 
"attained a minimum grade point average of C+  (2.3 or better on a 
4.0 scale) . 
evidence of only 
having attained a 2.1 grade point average. 

-provided 

By direction 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02790-99

    Original file (02790-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    official military record, the fitness report 2. Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Date of Report Reportinu Senior Period of Re~ort 6 Jan 98 970701 to 971231 (TR) 2 . However, First Lieutenant record retains serious competitive concerns due to poor -istribution, less competitive Section B marks, and the Reviewing Officer's comments on the Annual fitness report of 960429...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03760-99

    Original file (03760-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 June 1999, and the memorandum furnished by HQMC dated 25 August 1999, copies of which are attached. c. First Sergean explanations into is no excuse for Officer and Adverse Sighting Officer. Contrary to the information included in subparagraph 3b of reference (b), further research indicates that the Adverse Sighting Officer (Lieutenant Colone fitness...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01309-99

    Original file (01309-99.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. You further contend that the asterisk, which indicates a fitness report was referred to the Marine concerned for a chance to make a statement, contributed to your failures by the Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 and 1998 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. In our opinion, all three boards were able to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00030-99

    Original file (00030-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of your contested fitness report for 1 March to 30 September 1993. 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 warranting removal of the remaining contested fitness report, for 1 March 1991 to 26 April 1992. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02021-99

    Original file (02021-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by HQMC, dated 24 May 1999, and the Marine Corps Recruiting Command, dated 12 July 1999, copies of which are attached. a. Petitioner seeks removal from his records of all reference to his conviction by summary court-martial. Accordingly, we recommend relief be granted to the extent of ordering the removal from Petitioner's records of all references to his conviction at summary court-martial and all performance evaluations or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05707-99

    Original file (05707-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner's request to strike his failure of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this request has merit and warrants favorable action. Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness reports: Date of Report Re~ortinq Senior Period of Report 29 Jan 87 21 Oct 87 28...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 05214-98

    Original file (05214-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 12 and 16 April 1999, copies of which are attached. Until 1 September 1995, as a member of the Ready Reserve, and as such, W= be considered by promotion - - selection boards. A complete review of Lieutenant Commander record reveals that there were no properly considered during either failure of selection per reference (c).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00839-99

    Original file (00839-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Branch (PERB) to remove a Grade Change fitness report for the period 960801'to 970317. requests removal of his failure of selection on the FY99 USMC record and 3. ~ieutena-averall Value and Distribution contains two officers ranked above him and none below.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 02618-98

    Original file (02618-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that your contested adverse fitness report should not be removed. Regardless, the report under Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY LIEUTENAN SE OF FIRST USMC consideration is the official report of record and the one to which the petitioner responded. (7) ~ajor- advocacy letter of 23 November 1998 claims he was not aware that the petitioner 'was involved...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00023-99

    Original file (00023-99.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. Per MCO 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 18 December 1998 to...