Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02993-02
Original file (02993-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 BJG
Docket No: 2993-02
22 August 2003





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 21 August 2003. 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 31 May 2002, and the memorandum for the record dated 18 August 2003, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered your rebuttal letter dated 1 July 2002.

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 advisory opinion. Accordingly, 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,


Enclosure



U

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

                                     IN REPLY REFER TO:
                           1600
                                                                                                   MMOA-4
          31 May 02

 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    BCNR PETITION FOR LIEUTENTANT COLONEL
         Ref: (a) BCNR Request for Advisory Opinion in the case of Lieutenant
USMC of 16 May 02.
1. Recommend disapproval of Lieutenant Colonel request for removal of his failure of selection.
2.       Per the reference, we reviewed Lieutenant Colonel record and petition. Lieutenant Colonel
 failed selection on the FY03 USMC Colonel selection boar Lieutenant Colonel contends the letter and amplifying information he sent to the board was not present and that his Marine Corps Command and Staff diploma was missing. He further contends that these contributed to his failure of selection. Lieutenant Colonel equests removal of his failure of selection.
         
         3.       Lieutenant Colonel XXXX letter and amplifying information was received by the Officer Promotions Branch and given to the selection on board for consideration. This was verified
         
         4.       Lieutenant Colonel XXX Marine Corps Command and Staff diploma was not a part of his OMPF, nor was it displayed in the Military Education Section of his Master Brief Sheet (MBS). Lieutenant Colonel completed the Marine Corps Command and Staff course in 1995. His petition contains a MBS from 1999 which shows no indication of Command and Staff completion. Since this MBS was received by Lieutenant Colonel XXXX well prior to the board, he had adequate time to note the discrepancy and ensure that his completion was accurately documented in either his MBS or his OMPF. He sites several steps he took to ensure his record was complete, but these are clearly short of what would be considered reasonable efforts to ensure his record was complete.
         5.       Had Lieutenant Colonel XXXX Marine Corps Command and Staff certificate been available to the board it would have made his record more competitive.
         6. Point of contact



Colonel, U.S. ~. Marine Corps
Head, Officer Assignment Branch
Personnel Management Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR)
PERFORMANCE SECTION
2 NAVY ANNEX, SUITE 2432
WASHINGTON, DC 20370-5100
TELEPHONE:       (703) 614-2293 OR DSN 224-2293
FACSIMILE: (703) 614-9857 OR DSN 224-9857
MEMORANDUM FOR TUE RECORD

DATE:    18AUG03

DOCKET NO: 2993-02

PETITIONER

PARTY I CALLED:

WHAT I SAID: I ASKED CINDY IF THE FY-04 USMC COL SEL BD WAS AWARE THAT PET HAD COMPLETED CGSC. WHAT PARTY WERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08080-02

    Original file (08080-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 September 2002, and two memoranda for the record, dated 16 October and 20 November 2002, copies of which are attached. letter from him to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and endorsed by both reporting officials. rmance Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08216-01

    Original file (08216-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Humberd and Suiter and Mr. Lippolis, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2002, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on the date of this Report of Proceedings,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00337-02

    Original file (00337-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 1 February 2002, and a memorandum for the record (MFR) dated 11 March 2002, copies of which are attached. as listed with a d. Reference (c) states "...officers retired voluntarily shall be retired in th satisfactorily held ..." grade of Major effecti issioned officer grade luntarily retired in the e. Due t retirement on 990501, his selection to lieutenant colonel was nullified. Per references (d) and ( would...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06104-02

    Original file (06104-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I3oard 2oo0, 2001 or 2002 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection 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. Because this material was used in the board's decision to current date of selection on the FY03 licable material in his Lieutenant Colone The selection process and date of rank assignment of a 4. regularly scheduled board is different...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01252-02

    Original file (01252-02.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 (FY) 2002 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY 2003 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. That Petitioner...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05129-02

    Original file (05129-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    JEPARTMENT OF THE NAV Y HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANT ICO, V IRGINIA 221 34-51 0 3 : IN REPLY REFER TO 1610 MMER/PERB MAY ltitil 0 3 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APP SERGEAN E CASE OF STAFF USMC (a) (b) SSgt MC0 P1610.7D s DD Form 149 of 15 Jan 02 w/Ch 1-4 Per MC0 1610.11C, 1. with three members...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06669-03

    Original file (06669-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2003. Sincerely, Executive Directo Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VlROlNlA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1600 CMT 8 Sep 03 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: RESERVE AFFAIRS ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION: CASE OF COLONEL USMCR 1. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05322-02

    Original file (05322-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report for 1 January to 30 September 1998 be amended by changing the reporting senior’s certification to reflect your peer ’s primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) was “7543 [EA-6B pilot], ” rather than “7204 [anti-air warfare]. In this regard, they substantially concurred with the advisory opinion from CMT with respect to the error in your peer unlikely that the discrepancy concerning...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01138-01

    Original file (01138-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 BJG Docket No: 18 January 2002 11X3-01 C RET Dear Master Serg 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. memorandum for the record dated 15 January 2002, Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) will remove from your OMPF the references to your convictions. However, since he has...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04367-03

    Original file (04367-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board does not, however, agree with the petitioner that complete removal of the Reviewing Officer's comments is warranted. Recommend approval of Majo his failure of selection if t h e e d comments are removed from his record. In our opinion, if the PERB does remove the petitioned comments, it would marginally increase the competitiveness of the record.