DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
From:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
LCC:lc
Docket No. 1350-02
13 August 2002
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Secretary of the Navy
evlew 0
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
DD Form 149 w/attachments
(1)
(2) Rebuttal comments
(3)
(4) Remedial consideration denied
(5)
(6)
CMC ltr 2 Aug 01, removing fitness report
CMC, memo
Subject's microfiche record
1400/3 MMPR-2, 9 Apr 02
Pursuant to the
provis'ions of reference (a), Subject,
1.
hereinafter referred to as Petitioner,
enclosure
applicable naval record be corrected to show that Petitioner was
promoted to gunnery sergeant,
Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board.
(l), with this Board requesting, in effect, the
filed written application,
paygrade E-7, from the CY 2000
2.
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Beckett, Pfeiffer, and
Ms. McCormick reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 23 July 2002 and,
pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record.
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
Documentary material
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
3.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as
follows:
a.
Prior to filing enclosure (1) with this Board, Petitioner
exhausted all administrative remedies afforded under existing law
and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.
Petitioner believes that but for the fitness report for
the period 1 October 1997 to 25 February 1998 he would have been
selected for gunnery sergeant from the CY 2000 Gunnery Sergeant
Selection Board.
1
Docket No. 1350-02
C .
Petitioner was selected for recruiting duty based on an
outstanding record.
average yet he was advised by the reporting senior and the non-
commissioned officer in charge of the recruiting station that the
report was not adverse.
opportunity to respond or appeal the adverse fitness report.
Consequently, he was never given the
His detaching fitness report was below
d.
If a response to the adverse fitness report had been on
file when the promotion board first reviewed his records for
consideration for promotion to gunnery sergeant in CY 2000 his
comments and the fitness report would have been reviewed at the
same time, enclosure (2).
difference to the selection board and the Petitioner may have
been selected for gunnery sergeant in CY 2000.
It could possibly have made a
e.
After the selection board adjourned the Petitioner and
his recruiting station sergeant major reviewed the Petitioner's
personnel record to see if a reason could be found as to why the
Petitioner was not selected for promotion to gunnery sergeant.
They determined that the fitness report for the period
1 October 1997 to 25 February 1998 was the reason he had failed
selection.
f.
On 16 April 2001 Petitioner requested the fitness report
The report was removed via letter
be removed from his records.
dated 7 August 2001, enclosure (3).
g-
The CY 2001 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board convened on
24 April 2001, prior to the date that the Performance Evaluation
Review Board reviewed and approved the request to remove the
report from Petitioner's records.
report Petitioner was selected for promotion to gunnery sergeant.
Notwithstanding the adverse
h.
Petitioner then requested remedial consideration for
promotion based on the report being removed from his record and
was advised by CMC, MMPR-2,
promotion was denied because he could not receive remedial
consideration for a rank currently held or was selected to,
enclosure (4).
that remedial consideration for
2
Docket No. 1350-02
i.
In correspondence attached as enclosure
(5), the office
having cognizance over the subject matter involved in
Petitioner's application recommended denial, commenting that
because the adverse fitness report did not stop him from being
selected to gunnery sergeant,
should not be backdated.
the effective date of the promotion
(5), the
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
notwithstanding the comments contained in enclosure
Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the
The Board concluded that since competition is
requested relief.
extremely keen for promotion to gunnery sergeant that the adverse
report contained in the record could have kept the Petitioner
from being selected for promotion to gunnery sergeant in CY 2000.
When Petitioner was considered for gunnery sergeant during CY
2000 he had received only two fitness reports which were on file
following the adverse report in his records.
During CY 2001
Petitioner received two additional reports which then gave the
selection Board a total of 4 reports following the adverse report
and the selection Board had twice as much data to review.
The
Board determined that since the gunnery sergeant selection board
had the additional reports to review they had a broader picture
to look at to select Petitioner for gunnery sergeant.
also concluded that if the adverse report had not been in the
record that the Petitioner would have been selected for gunnery
sergeant during the CY 2000 selection process.
The Board
Accordingly, the Board recommends the following corrective
action.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropriate,
to show that
a.
effective
Petitioner was promoted to
1 February 2001.
paygrade E-7
b.
That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
review and deliberations,
and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Boards proceedings in the above-entitled
matter.
Docket No. 1350-02
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
G. L. ADAMS
Acting Recorder
The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your
5.
review and action.
Reviewed and approved:
.I?
Joseph G. Lynch
Assistant General Counsel
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01607-07
On April 15, 2005, Petitioner, through counsel, submitted an application to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) seeking removal of the January 1, 2001 to July 7,2Docket No. 01607-072001 fitness report, removal of naval records pertaining to the NJP and a remedial promotion board See enclosure (4)g. Petitioner’s request was bifurcated. Here, Petitioner did not take any action to have his fitness report removed until 15 April 2005, well after the dates of the Selection Boards...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04798-02
"in zone" population, two opportunity for promotion may g. USMC, RAP-36, the office responsible for establishing the promotion criteria for the active reserve master sergeants recommended that the each Marine erroneously considered in the "below enclosure (2). MC0 j. Petitioner then submitted a request to the Board for Correction of Naval Records requesting consideration for promotion to E-8 before an Enlisted Remedial Selection Board alleging that he was only given a 41.6% opportunity when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01685-06
In the alternative, you now request new enlisted remedial selection boards (ERSB’s) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1999, 2000 and 2001 master sergeant and first sergeant selection boards.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. The Board found the ~Th’IPR-2 advisory opinion dated 2 August 2006 was correct as to the number of Marines with whom you were compared, despite the indications, in the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08229-01
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Kastner and Rothlein and Ms. Schnittman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 3 January 2002, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) removed 1996 weight control entries relating to Petitioner from the Marine Corps Total Force System after he had been considered and not selected by the CY 1999 and not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07166-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of the contested fitness report for 1 January to 2 February 1996. The Board also considered your rebuttal letter dated 30 July 2002 with enclosures.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 concluding that no further correction to your fitness report record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06522-99
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) DD Form 149 w/attachments Ltr of 22 Jul 97 to President of FY 97 Staff Sergeant Promotion Board Request of 20 Jan 98 to expunge fitness report CMC ltr of 3 Apr 98 approving the removal of fitness report Request to extend on active duty for remedial promotion consideration and denial Ltr of Apr 98 requesting remedial promotion consideration and denial CMC MMPR-2 memo of 10 Jan 00 Microfiche Records Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), subject, that the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09317-02
9317-02 21 August 2003 Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Review of naval record (a) Title 10 U.S.C. The Marines considered for promotion for the CY 2001 Reserve Staff Noncommissioned Officer Selection Board were given only a 41.6% promotion opportunity when the Marine Corps guidelines guarantee a minimum of 60% opportunity for promotion to E-8. Inflation of the promotion zone is not listed as one of the reasons for remedial promotion nevertheless when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07967-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure applicable naval record be corrected by removing his fitness report for 1 October 2000 to 3 1 July 2001, a copy of which is at Tab A to enclosure (1). fifth highest, in F.3 ( “setting the ” the reviewing officer ” the g. Petitioner provided a supporting letter dated 30 April 2002 (Tab E to enclosure (1)) from the RS who submitted the contested transfer fitness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06554-07
That board considered Petitioner for promotion, but did not select him.d. Based on the findings and action of the PERB, the Board concludes that the marginal fitness reports should not have been part of Petitioner’s naval record when he was considered for promotion in 2006.Whether Petitioner would have been selected for promotion in 2006 or not (without the marginal fitness reports) cannot be known and is largely a matter of conjecture. Moreover, when asked to provide substantive comments...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07773-02
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 CMC memorandum 1400 MMPR 2 of 17 October 2002, a copy of which is attached. when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...