DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

BJG
Docket No: 5327-01
17 September 2001

SMCR

Dear Colon

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 September 2001. 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 report of the Headquarters Marine Corps 
Review Board (PERB), dated 3 July 2001, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Career
Management Team, dated 2 August 2001, copies of which are attached.

(HQMC) Performance Evaluation

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 report of the  PERB in finding that your contested fitness reports should stand. Since
the Board found no defect in your performance record, they had no basis to strike your
failures by the Fiscal Year 2000 through 2002 Reserve Colonel Selection Boards.
the above, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the
panel will be furnished upon request.

In view of

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.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official

In this

records. Consequently, 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

.when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosures

iPARTMENT OF THE NAV Y

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORP S

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO. VIRGINIA  

22134.5103

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1610
MMER/PERB

3 

JUL 

2iJOl

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFO
ADVISORY OPINION ON
LIEUTENANT COLONE

RMA NCE EVALUAT ION  REVIEW 
BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

BOARD 

(PERB)

USMCR

Ref:

(a) 
(b) 

LtC
MC0 

P1610.7D

DD Form 149 of   16 Mar 01

1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

Per 

MC0 

1.
with three members present,
Lieutenant Colone
Removal of the following fitness

met on 27 June 2001 to consider

petition contained in reference (a).

reports was requested:

a.

b.

Report A

- 950617 to 951130 (AR)

Report B

- 951201 to 960602 (EN)

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing
the submission of both reports.

The petitioner contends that when reviewed in its total

2.
context, Report A presents an unfavorable word-picture of his
performance as a battalion commander.
petitioner observes that even though the appraisal reflects some
it was not sufficient to ameliorate the leadership
improvement,
concerns surfaced in the preceding evaluation (i.e., Report A).
the petitioner believes both
Given the negative implications,
reports should have been processed as "adverse" material prior
to being accepted into his official military personnel file.

Concerning Report B, the

In its proceedings,

3.
administratively correct and procedurally complete as written
and filed.

The following is offered as relevant:

the PERB concluded that both reports are

a.

Both reports are succinct, candid, and straight-forward

accounts of successful performance of duty and how the
petitioner accomplished his leadership and command responsi-
bilities.
in Section B or comments in Section C that render either report
"adverse" as that'term is defined in reference (b).

There are not, as the petitioner contends, any marks

.

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON
LIEUTENANT COLONE

BCNR APPLICATION

IN THE CASE OF

USMCR

Consequently, the reports were correctly not referred to the
petitioner for acknowledgement and the opportunity to comment.

b.

There are various valid leadership styles that are

There is nothing

successful in producing satisfactory results.
untoward about a "consensus building" leadership style.
Further, the Reporting Senior was well within the spirit and
intent of reference (b) in making growth potential comments
regarding the petitioner's leadership and tactical maturation.
Even officers in the grade of lieutenant colonel, and especially
members of the Reserve establishment who are only in a military
environment a minimal amount of time, are expected to grow.
That is the exact fruition that occurred and was recorded in
Report B.

C .

Not withstanding the petitioner's contentions that the
he offers no substantiation they are

reports are unfavorable,
not true and accurate accounts of his overall performance during
the stated periods.
how or why the petitioner rated more than what has been
recorded.
injustice.

To this end, the PERB discerns absolutely no error or

Likewise, we find nothing to show precisely

The Board's opinion,

4.
based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness reports should remain a part
of Lieutenant Colon

official military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

2

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280 RUSSELL ROA

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

D

 ‘7

 2

_->

 

:_,  

\

..- 

,

/
“\ i’’ 

;

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1070
CMT
2 Aug 01

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

RESERVE AFFAIRS REVIEW OF FAILURE OF SELECTION
ADVISORY OPINION
LIEUTENANT COLON
USMCR

Ref:

(a) 

LtCo

FORM 149 dtd 16 Mar 2001

1.
We have reviewe
removal of failures
of the Annual Report dated 950617 to 951130 and the Ending
Report dated 951201 to 960602 and recommend that it not be
granted.

ieutenant Colone
selection to Colonel based on the removal

equest for

In the 

and Economy of Management.

career spans almost 25 years as an

career, he had some early and

Lieutenant Colone
tour

2.
officer.
significant trends in the following areas: Regular Duties,
Judgment, Handling Officers, Military Presence, Administrative
His
Duties, Training Personnel,
trends occurred up through the rank of captain and to a lesser
degree through Major.
maturation over time.
below 60 officers, with 59 and above 41.
fitness reports in question would not change this significantly;
He was not ranked
he would still be ranked below 53 officers.
consistently to the right of his peers until he was a mid-grade
there is no indication in his record that
major.
Based on
he has completed the PME appropriate for his grade.
the above and the selection rate to the rank of colonel, he
appears to be less than competitive when compared with his
peers.

Overall, his career and abilities showed
Throughout his career, he has been ranked

The removal of the

Furthermore,

3.

The point of contact  

cone
commercia

,at 

’

’ Lieutenant

,