DEPARTMENT  OF THE  NAVY 

BOARD  FOR  CORRECTION  OF  NAVAL  RECORDS 

2  NAVY  ANNEX 

WASHINGTON  DC  2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

BIG 
Docket No:  5737-03 
7 August 2003 

From: 
To: 

Chairman, Board  for Correction of  Naval Records 
Secretary of  the Navy 

Subj : 

c
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 

s

-

-

 

Ref: 

(a)  Title  10 U.S.C.  1552 

Encl: 

(1)  DD Form  149 dtd 2 Apr  03 wlattachments 
(2)  HQMC MMER  memo dtd  2 Jul03 wlencl 
(3)  HQMC MMOA-4 memo dtd 30 Jun 03 
(4)  Subject's naval  record 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of  reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, 
filed enclosure (1) with  this Board  requesting, in  effect, that his naval record be corrected by 
modifying the fitness report for 4 January to  12 May 2001 (copy at Tab A to enclosure (1)). 
As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance 
Evaluation Review Board  (PERB) has directed the requested  modification of  the fitness report 
by  changing the reviewing officer's  "comparative assessment" from sixth highest (of  eight) to 
fourth highest.  Petitioner further requested  removal of  his failure of  selection before the 
Fiscal Year  2004 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board,  so as to be considered by  the selection 
board  that next convenes to consider officers of  his category for promotion  to the grade of 
lieutenant colonel as an  officer who has not  failed of  selection to that grade. 

2.  The Board, consisting of Messrs.  Bishop, Neuschafer,  and Schultz, reviewed Petitioner's 
allegations of error and injustice on  31 July 2003, 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. 

3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of  record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations 
of  error and  injustice, finds as follows: 

a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies 

available under  existing law and  regulations within the Department of  the Navy. 

b. 

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.' 

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 the 
following corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

a.  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 an  officer who has not  failed of  selection for promotion to that grade. 

b.  That any  material or entries inconsistent with  or relating to the Board's 

recommendation be corrected, removed or completely expunged from Petitioner's record and 
that no  such entries or material be added  to the record in  the future. 

c.  That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's naval record be returned 

to the Board, together with  a copy of  this Report of  Proceedings, for retention in a 
confidential file maintained  for such purpose, with  no cross reference being  made a part of 
Petitioner's naval record. 

4.  Pursuant to Section 6(c) of  the revised Procedures of  the Board for Correction of Naval 
Records (32 Code of  Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was 
present at the Board's review and  deliberations, and  that the foregoing is a true and  complete 
record  of  the Board's proceedings in  the above entitled matter. 

ROBERT D.  ZSALMAN 
Recorder 

JONATHAN S. RUSKIN 
Acting Recorder 

5.  Pursuant to the delegation of  authority set out in  Section 6(e) of  the revised Procedures of 
the Board  for Correction of  Naval  Records (32 Code of  Federal Regulations, Section 
723.6(e)) and  having assured compliance with  its provisions, it is hereby announced that the 
foregoing corrective action, taken  under the authority of  reference (a), has been  approved by 
the Board  on  behalf  of  the Secretary of  the Navy. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S   U N I T E D  S T A T E S   M A R I N E  C O R P S  

3280 R U S S E L L   R O A D  

Q U A N T I C O ,   V I R G I N I A   221 3 4 - 5  103 

I N  REPLY REFER TO: 
1610 
MMER 
2 Jul 03 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Subj : 

N THE CASE d 

Encl :  (1) Copy of CMC ltr 1610 MMER/PERB of 25 Jun 03 

(2) CMC Advisory Opinion 1610 MMOA-4 of 30 Jun 03 
(3) Copy of CMC ltr 1610 MMER/PERB of 2 Jul 03 

1.  As evidenced by enclosure  (I), PERB directed modification to 
the Comparative ~ssessment mark  (Section K3) 
fitness report for the period 20010104 to 200 

2.  We defer to BCNR on the issu 
for the removal of his failure o 
Lieutenant Colonel.  Enclosure  (2) is furnished to assist in 
resolving that matter. 

3.  By enclosure (3), this Headquarters provid 
with a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained 

Review Branch 
Personnel Management Division 
By direction of the Commandant 
of the Marine Corps 

DEPARTMENT O F  THE NAVY 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S   U H \ T E D   S T A T E S  M A R l N E  C O R P S  

3200 R U S S E L L   R O A D  

Q U A N T I C O .   V I R G I N I A   22 134.5 1 0 3  

IN REPLY R E F E R  T O :  
1610 
MMER/ PERB 
JUN  2  5  2003 

From:  Commandant of the Ma* 
To:  II-1' 

S u b j :  

CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD 

(a) Your DD Form 149 of 2 Apr 03 
(b) MCO 1610.11C 

This responds to your request contained in reference (a). 

2 .   Per the provisions of reference (b), the Performance 
Evaluation Review Board  (PERB) has reviewed allegations of error 
and injustice in your naval record. 

3 .   Having reviewed all the facts, the Board has directed that 
Section K3  (Comparative Assessment) of your fitness report for 
TD) will be modified as 
the period 2001010 
., top block in the category 
requested by Colon 
qualified. .  . I t ) .  
entitled "one of t 

4.  I n   addition to the foregoing the Performance Evaluation 
System  (the data base that generates your Master ~ r i e f  sheet) 
will be corrected accordingly. 

5.  The Commandant of the Marine Corps is not empowered to grant 
or deny the removal of failure(s) of selection from a naval 
record.  Accordingly, your case will be forwarded to the Board 
for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) for consideration of that 
issue. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S   U N I T E D  S T A T E S   M A R I N E  C O R P S  

3280 R U S S E L L   R O A D  

Q U A N T I C O ,   V I R G I N I A   2 2 1  34-5 1 0 3  

W E P L Y  REFER TO: 

MMOA - 4 
30 Jun 03 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 

NAVAL RECORDS 

Subj:  BCNR PETITION FO 

USMC 

Ref: 

1.  Recommend approval o 
of his failure of selec 

s request for removal 

Lieutenan 
Performance Evaluation Review Board  (PERB) to 
Temporary Duty report dated 010104 to 010512. 
requests removal of his failure of selection. 

petitioned the 

- 

3.  In our opinion, the favorable PERB action does marginally 
improve the competitiveness of the record.  But with the 
petitioned report modifie 
contains considerable com 
areas : 

record still 
the following 

- 

served as a squadron 
is a key leadership 

a. Key Billets. 
Aircraft Maintenan 
billet for his MOS, and therefore his performance in this 
billet is a key indicator of his competitiveness. His two 
fitness reports from this billet have relative values of 
88.43 and 89.94, and the Reviewing Officer's marks are 
slightly below the average. While the comments in general 
are fairly strong, they are lacking some of the comments 
that typically add strength to a record. The reports 
contain recommendations for future staff billets, but not 
for command. 

- 

- 

b. Relative Value and Reviewing Officer Marks.  Overall, 

omparative assessments fall slightly 
of his six relative values are below 
ninety. After the modification of the petitioned report, 
his overall reviewing officer marks still characterize as 
mid-pack. 

4.  In summary, the favorable PERB action did marginally improve 
the competitiveness o 
recognize his record c 
concern, we believe 
benefit of the doub 
removal of his failure of selection. 

uld be afforded the 
oval of his request for 

- 

ecord. ~ h o u ~ h  
we- 
of competitive 

-7- 

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