Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01309-99
Original file (01309-99.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 

BJG 
Docket No:  1309-99 
4 June 1999 

Dear  co1- 

. 

. 

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  3 June  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  Headquarters Marine Corps, dated  16 April  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. 

You  contend that had  you  been  advised that your  submitting a rebuttal to your  fitness report 
for  1 October  1987 to  6 June  1988 would  cause your  report to be marked by  an  asterisk on 
your Master Brief  Sheet (MBS),  you  would  not have made a rebuttal.  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.  They did  not agree that the asterisk harmed your 
chances for promotion.  In  this regard, they  particularly noted  that the asterisk did  nothing to 
change the contents of  your  report to which  it related.  While they  recognized that the asterisk 
may  well  have drawn attention to this report, they  further observed that the low  marks in  the 
report would  have caused it to  stand out on  your MBS  in  any event.  Since they  found an 
insufficient basis to  remove your failures of  selection for promotion, they  found no grounds to 
change your lieutenant colonel date of  rank and  effective date to reflect your  selection by  the 
FY 1997 promotion board. 

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, 

W.  DEAN PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 

Enclosure 

DEPARTMENT OF T H E  NAVY 

HEADQUARTERS 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  ROAD 

QUANTICO,  VIRGINIA  2 2 1 3 4 - 5  103 

IN R E P L Y  REFER TO: 

1 6 0 0  
MMOA- 4 
16 Apr  99 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Subj:  BCNR PETITION FOR LIEUTENANT COLONE 

-SMC 

Ref: 

the case of 

3 

- 

1.  Recommend disapproval of Lieutenant Colone 
petition to backdate his date of rank to 1 i e u t . l .  

2.  Per the reference, we reviewed Lieutenant Colone 
record and petition.  He failed selection on the FY97 and FY98 
USMC Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.  Subsequently, he was 
selected for lieutenant colonel on the FY99 USMC Lieutenant 
Colonel Selection Board from above the primary zone without 
altering the record.  He requests backdating of his date of rank 
to lieutenant colonel. 

3.  In our opinion, all three boards were able to review and 
evaluate Lieutenant colone- 
it was the best and most fully qualified in relation to the other 
records considered by that particular board.  Furthermore, being 
selected by the FY99 Board from above the primary zone does not 
imply that he did not receive a complete and fair evaluation by 
the FY97 and FY98 Boards.  Therefore, we believe Lieutenant 
Colonel- 
disapproval of his petition to backdate his date of rank to 
lieutenant colonel. 

r-.tition is without  merit  and  r ~ - ~ n n ~ r ^ 1  

record and decide whether 

4.  Point of contact is Major 

Colonel, U. S. Marine Corps 
Head, Officer Assignment Branch 
Personnel Management Division 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03152-99

    Original file (03152-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | 03044-99

    Original file (03044-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2001 | 08227-01

    Original file (08227-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THF NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BJG Docket No: 8227-01 16 November 2001 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: L T REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD , USM Refi (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08224-98

    Original file (08224-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. 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, he unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the fitness report for the period 970125-970731 and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02227-99

    Original file (02227-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) reviewed the petition and denied the request. (3) This report also did not appear before the FY98 Board. e. Written comments by Reporting Seniors and Reviewing Officers.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07639-98

    Original file (07639-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 03301-01

    Original file (03301-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD NAVY ANNEX 2 WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 S HD: hd Docket No: 03301-01 15 February 2002 Dear Command This is in reference to your application dated 20 April 2001 for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, United States Code, section 1552, seeking removal of your failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 97 and 98 Lieutenant Commander Staff Selection Boards, and reinstatement to active duty as a...

  • 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 | 03535-99

    Original file (03535-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    c. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's naval record be returned to the Board, together with a copy of this Report of confidential file maintained for such purpose, with Petitioner's naval record. DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY HEADQUARTERS U N I T E D STATES MARINE RPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1600 MMOA- 4 12 Jul 99 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS FOR FIRST LIEUTENAN C Ref: (a) MMER...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00878-01

    Original file (00878-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 chief warrant officer-3 (CWO-3) he would have been assigned had he been selected for promotion to that grade by the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 CWO-3 Selection Board, vice the FY 2001 CWO-3 Selection Board. &rt in Section...