Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Tue Oct 03 09_03_39 CDT 2000
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20370-5100

BJGDocket No: 6339-98
8 April 1999

~HI USMC

r

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10, 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 8 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 Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 2 October 1998, 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 the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained

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.

~ ~3c/.-~9.~’

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

HEADQUARTERS

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1600
MMOA-4
2 Oct 98

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj

BCNR PE ITION FOR

,USMC

____

Ref:

(a) MMER Request for Advisor

0 in

pà~*tiIiIJ*~~*~iJ

of 24 Sept 98

.

e case of

usNc

1. Recommend disapproval of MajoiIi1f1J~request to remove
his failure of selection and for a Special Selection Board.

Per the reference, we reviewed Maj~~~~j)s record and

2.
petition.
Colonel Selection Board.
failure of selection and a Special Selection Board.

He failed selection on the FY99 USMC Lieutenant

Maj~~1Iftl~It~cequestsremoval of his

In our opinion,

The board was able to review

In our opinion, the record as it appeared before the FY99

3.
Board was substantially correct.
and evaluate MajoiUtI1Ifl~)1tbrecord and decide whether it was the
best and most fully qualified in relation to the other records
considered by that particular board.
he did not receive a complete and fair evaluation by the FY99
Board.
the areas of competitive concern in~ is record,~and makes an
attempt to explain away his ~
that neither his briefer nor the other members of the Board were
capable of properly evaluating his record.
presumptuous of us to comment ~
the Board did not take all parts of his record into
consideration.
action which would favorably improve his record.

Furthermore, his petition contains no requested

has correctly highlighted

allegations that

~

that

It would be

In summary, we believe that

4.
without merit.
fair evaluation by the FY99 Board.
disapproval ~

His record received a’substantially complete and

petition is

Therefore, we recommend

petition to remove his

Subj:

BCNR PETITIQN FOR MA~ 13 ~T..
u~Jfflj$~hSMC

~

failure of selection and for a Special Selection Board.

ajar, U.

S. Marine Corps

Head, Officer Counseling and
Evaluation Section
Officer Assignment Branch
Personnel Management Division

2



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2001 | 05507-01

    Original file (05507-01.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. evidence that the board acted contrary to law, the action of the board involved material error of fact or material administrative error, or the board did not have material information before it. This is the date of rank he would have in this matter is Chief Warrant Officer 2 DEPARTMENT OF...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 01105-99

    Original file (01105-99.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. the PERB concluded that the report is a. Notwithstand' the statements of both the petitioner and there is no showing that the petitioner tunity to append an official rebuttal to When the petitioner acknowledged the adverse First Lieutenan was not afforde the fitness report. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06620-00

    Original file (06620-00.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 by removing his failure of selection before the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 Captain Selection Board; returning him to the Regular Marine Corps effective 1 November 1999; and changing the date of rank and effective date of his promotion to captain to reflect selection by the FY 1999 Captain Selection...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 04333-01

    Original file (04333-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 17 and 25 July 2001, copies of which are attached. Majo selection for the convened on 991026. date of rank and effective date of promotion to major. FYOl USMC Major Promotion Selection Board that s requesting back advisory opinion in the case of s requesting removal of failure of Further, Maj 2 .