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 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00
BJG
Docket No: 1159-99
28 May 1999
5 USMCR
b
Dear colone-
This is in reference to your letter dated ,1 l February 1999, seeking reconsideration of your
previous application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10
of the United States Code, section 1552. Your previous case, docket number 1858-97, was
denied on 17 October 1997. Your current case is a reconsideration of your request to remove
your adverse fitness report for 1 December 1995 to 5 August 1996 and your failure by the
Fiscal Year (FY) 1998 Reserve Colonel Selection Board. You are now also requesting
removal of your failures by the FY 1999 and 2000 Reserve Colonel Selection Boards.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, reconsidered your case on 27 May 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 wnsidered by the Board consisted of your
letter, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior
case, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the
Board considered the memorandum from the Headqumters Marine Corps Personnel
Management Division, Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department (MMER), dated
31 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. They also considered your rebuttal letter dated
26 April 1999.
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 memorandum from MMER. They also found that even if generals with authority over
your reviewing officer, specifically, the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps and the
Commanding General, Marine Forces Reserve, influenced his decision to relieve you for
cause, this would not support setting aside your relief. Since they still found no defect in
your performance record, they still had no basis to show you have not failed of selection for
promotion. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief. 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
DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY
HLADQUARTERS U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E CORPS
3 2 8 0 R U S S E L L R O A D
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 2 2 1 3 4 - 5 1 0 3
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER
31 Mar 99
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj : REQUES
COLONE
SE OF LIEUTENANT
USMCR
Ref:
(a) LtCol -1tr
of 11 Feb 99 w/attachments
Encl: (1) LtCol.
'BCNR Case File
1. I have reviewed the reference and all attachments, and
conclude that the information and advocacy statements contained
- ~
do not refute the facts as recorded i
comments appended to Lieutenant Colone
for the period 951201 to 960805 (CD).
ier General
fitness
2. While the individuals furnishing statements on behalf of
Lieutenant colonell(Jrmay
influence" by officers senior to Brigadier General
I find no such showing. Conspicuously absent is anything from
Brigadier ~eneral-at
subscribes to the existence of "undue influence."
opine that an environment of "undue
xisted,
recants his actions and comments or
3. I emphasize the PERB's previous position that Lieutenant
~olonelJlWllPllPkas relieved due to Brigadier Genera-loss
of confidence in that officer's support of the Commandant's core
values. This was well within the General's prerogative and a
matter that has been correctly recorded via the performance
evaluation system. As a Squadron Co~uudnder, L i e u t e i m i i t C01~rir;l
-had
an inherent obligation to stop the show rather than to
just leave the premises. The guidance from the Commandant of the
flarine Corps to
Marines is (and has been) "zero tolerance" in
situations that are morally questionable. Simply stated,
Lieutenant colonel-rred
and was held accountable.
Subj : REQUEST
COLONEL
LIEUTENANT
4. In view of the foregoing, I decline to have the PERB
reconsider Lieutenant ~olone-case . .
and return the
enclosure without action.
Deputy Director, Personnel
Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03136-99
(HQMC) d. Enclosure (2) is the report of the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) in Petitioner ’s case.The report reflects the PERB decision that Petitioner for removal of his fitness report should be denied This report reads in pertinent part as follows: ’s request . to not report the DUI conviction. ” (b), the applicable Marine Corps Order governing .civilian conviction will be reported in the CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07639-98
The new statements at enclosures (2) through (4) of your current application, among these a statement from the reviewing officer who acted on your fitness report at issue, did not persuade them that this report should be removed. 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. Subsequently, Major Performance Evaluation Review Board for removal from the record of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 02618-98
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 | 01555-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. V I R G I N I A 22 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/ PERB MAR 3 1999 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF SERGEAY , USMC Ref: (a) SSgt- (b) MCO P1610.7C...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05707-99
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 | CY1999 | 03152-99
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 lieutenant colonel he would have been assigned had he been selected for promotion to that grade by the Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. He...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03760-99
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 | 03044-99
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 lieutenant colonel he would have been assigned had he been selected for promotion to that grade by the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00839-02
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E NAVY BOARD F O R C O R R E C T I O N OF NAVAL R E C O R D S 2 NAVY ANNEX W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0 BJG Docket No: 839-02 25 February 2002 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD - - Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has directed the requested correction of Petitioner's...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00098-01
The Board did not consider this request, because this investigation report is not in his record. Petitioner also argued that the Finally, he asserted the reviewing h. Enclosure (2) is the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) in Petitioner ’s case, reflecting their decision to deny his request to remove the contested fitness report. The memorandum for the record at enclosure (7) reflects that both the contested adverse fitness report and...