Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03768-03
Original file (03768-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 BJG
Docket No: 3768-03
21 August 2003






This is in reference to your letter of 29 July 2003, seeking reconsideration of your previous applications for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
On 13 September 2001, the Board denied your previous request, docket number 6346-01, to remove the fitness report for 1 October to 12 December 1991. On 20 March 2003, the Board denied your previous request, docket number 7823-02, to remove your failures of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 and 2004 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. Your current request is either to remove the original report for the period in question and replace it with a revised report for the same period, showing your peer ranking as “1” of “9,” or amend the original report by changing the peer ranking from 1191? of 11931 to “ 1” of 39933; or if neither of these actions is possible, remove the original report; and remove the failures of selection by the FY 2003 and 2004 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case 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 letter, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board’s files on your prior cases, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Branch, Personnel Management Division (MMER), dated 5 August 2003, and the HQMC Officer Counseling and Evaluation Section, Personnel Management Division (MMOA-4), dated 7 August 2003, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 29 July 2003 with enclosure and your electronic mail transmissions of 15 and 19 August 2003.








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 from MMER in concluding that no correction to your fitness report record was warranted. Since the Board again found no defect in your performance record, it again had no basis to remove your failures of selection by the FY 2003 and 2004 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief. 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,






Enclosures





















DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134.5103
                                                               IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                                                         1610
                                                                                           MMER
                                                                                          5 Aug 03
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTIONN OF
NAVAL RECORDS

 Subj:    RECONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR XXXX

Ref:     (a) Co1onel
 (b) PERB Advisory Opinion 1610 MMER/PERB of 10 Aug 01;
          Subj: Maj XXXX USMC

 1.       The Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) declines to reconsider request to adjust his ranking in the Reporting Senior’s Cértification on page two of his fitness report for the period 911001 to 921212 (TR)
2. Specifically noted in Colonel XXXX better at reference (a) are the following comments: “I respect, I could have (emphasis added), with clear conscience, rated him one of nine with no statistical effect on the other eight as the reporting occasion was a Transfer Report not requiring written reports on the other Captains. Had I to do it over again, I would rank him one of nine.” It is imperative to keep in mind that the Performance Evaluation System is not based on “retrospect”, but rather a timely evaluation of performance and a conscious decision at that time regarding rank placement (in this case, “9 of 9”). Colonel specifically addressed that issue in Section C of the challenged report.
3. Not withstanding Colonel XXXX better, the PERB finds no reason to disturb or revisit the findings documented in reference (b)
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN RELY REFER TO:
MMOA-4
          7 Aug 03
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS

 Subj:    BCNR PETITION FOR MAJOR XXXX
Ref: (a) BCNR Request for Advisory 0inipn in the case of
         

         1.                Recommend approval of request for removal of his failures of selection if the petitioned report is modified.
         
         2.       Per the reference, we reviewed record and petition.      Filed selection on the FY03 and FY04 USMC Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. modification of the Transfer report dated 911001 to 911212. He also requests removal of his failures of selection.
         
         .        poor Value and Distribution almost certainly conl±ributed to his failures of selection. Currently his Value and Distribution is twenty-two ranked above him and twenty-two ranked below him. Modification of the report would change his Value and Distribution to fourteen ranked above him and thirty ranked below him. In our o inion this change would increase the competiveness of
4. In summary, the petitioned fitness reports contain competitive concerns that may have contributed to the failure of selection. The modification of the report would increase the competitiveness of
Therefore, we recommend approval Of his request for removal of the failures of selection if the petitioned report is modified.
                  
                  5. POC is Lt


                                                                                 Lieutenant, USMC
                                                                                 Head, Officer Counseling and
                                                                                 Evaluation Section
                                                                                 Personnel Management Division

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07123-01

    Original file (07123-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner’s request to strike his failures of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this request has merit and warrants favorable action. (3), this Headquarters provided Lieutenant th a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05329-01

    Original file (05329-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your last request was not considered, as you have not been selected for or promoted to lieutenant colonel. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has Date of Report Reportin gSenio r Period of Report 11 Apr 00 There will be inserted in your Naval record a memorandum in 2. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to record and e FY02 USMC remove the To He successfully...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02098-00

    Original file (02098-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your request to enter a “CD” (change of duty) fitness report for 9 March to 10 April 1991, reflecting service in combat with the primary duty of adjutant, could not be considered, as you did not provide such a report. the Reporting Senior's actions in 3c is in no way an invalidating factor in Reference (b) did not contain a very filling out Item 3c and Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05737-03

    Original file (05737-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner's request to strike his failure of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this rcquest has merit and warrants favorable action.' Per the provisions of reference (b), the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has reviewed allegations of error and injustice in your naval record. His two fitness reports from this billet have relative values of 88.43 and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08728-01

    Original file (08728-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The contested fitness reports were not removed until after both of Petitioner failures of selection to lieutenant colonel. ’s C. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC Officer Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division (MMOA4) has commented to the effect that Petitioner request to remove his FY 2002 failure of selection has merit and warrants favorable action. z's request for de of Enclosure (2) is furnished to assist in selec By enclosure 3. with a copy of the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08284-01

    Original file (08284-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    ’s failures C. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC Officer Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division (MMOA4) has commented to the effect that Petitioner request to remove his FY 2002 failure of selection has merit and warrants favorable action. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Report -__- _____.__...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07330-02

    Original file (07330-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    atbched as enclosure CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (3), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting limited relief, specifically, removal of Petitioner ’s failure of selection for promotion. That Petitioner’s record be corrected so that he will be considered by the earliest possible selection board convened to consider officers of his category for promotion to lieutenant colonel as...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05333-01

    Original file (05333-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Keport Reporting Senior Period of Report 22 Jan 99 980801 to 981231 (CH) There will be inserted in your Naval record a memorandum in 2. review ailed + Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to remove the Change of Reporting Senior Fitness Report for the period 980801 to 981231. equests...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07185-01

    Original file (07185-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Enclosure (2) is furnished to assist in By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at enclosure (3), this Headquarters provided Majo ith Head, "Performance Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 1610 MMER/PERB 23 kU6 20% From: Co To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C MC 41 Per the reference, the Performance Evaluation Review Board 1. has reviewed allegations of error and injustice in your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07065-03

    Original file (07065-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BJG Docket No: 7065-03 28 August 2003 From: To: Subj : Ref: Encl: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy USM RD (a) Title 10 U.S.C. As indicated in enclosure (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has directed the requested correction of Petitioner’s fitness report record. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Adams, Geisler and Zsalman, reviewed...