Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03198-07
Original file (03198-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37Q~.51OG


 BJG
 Docket No: 3198-07
 29 June 2007


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-me m ber panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2007. 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 from Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 11 May 2007, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered your undated rebuttal letter 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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion, except to note you did apply for correction of your naval record before you had been considered by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, by which you sustained the contested failure of selection. The Board noted that the corrections to your fitness report record, which were directed
by the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board and not this Board, were not effected until after the FY 2008 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board had adjourned on 22 September 2006. Therefore, the precept guidance you cited, as to a selection board member’s having knowledge of the circumstances surrounding a fitness report’s removal, is inapplicable. Finally, the Board was unable to find your promotion board did not follow the precept regarding the weight to be given all assigned billets. In view of the above, 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,



W DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director





Enclosure































DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1600
 MMO A- 4
11 May 07
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS



1.       Recommend disapproval for removal of his failure of selection from the FY08 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.
2.       Per the reference, we review record and petition. He failed selection on the FY08 USMC Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. Subsequently, he petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to remove the. (TR) report dated 20010401 to 20010509 and selected section “I” Reporting Senior comments from the (CH) report dated 20000731 to 20010331. The PERB granted the requested relief. Additionally, Manpower Management Support Bran ch (NMSB) corrected the billet his (CH) report dated 20020602 to 2002111 s ubsequently requested removal of his failure of selection.
3.       Removal of the petitioned report and comments does slightly improve the competitiveness of the record; however, Major XXXX ’s record contains other competitive jeopardy that most likely caused his failure of selection:
(a)      MOB Cred ibi1ity. Initially a Motor Transport Officer, transitioned to F/A-18 WSO, completing his training in March 1999 spent approximately two years in a fleet squad m oved to the MAC as a Frag Officer. Thereafter as assigned to a training squadron and then requested orders as a student at USMC Command and Staff College. Upon completion of resident ILS, shortly before the FY08 Lieutenant Colonel Selection         Board convened   was assigned to Marine Corps Combat Development Command          as an action officer. Thus, in his
         current paygrade as spent no time as an F/A-i s WSO in an F/A-18 operating forces squadron; in total, throughout his career, he has only 13 months of observed time as a WSO in a fleet squadron.
(b)      Lack of Diversity as a Majo r served on a high level staff or in a joint assignment. Many of his peers selected for promotion have gained experience in one of these assignments as a major.
(c)      Performance. As reflected in his predominantly mid-values and with-pack Reviewing Officer marks, per formance would not have been remarkable outweigh his lack of MOS credibility and lack of diversity of assignments as a Major.
4.       In summary, although the PERB’s action in case slightly increased the competitiveness of is      we do not believe it warrants the removal of his failure of selection and believe that it is definitely unlikely that he would be selected for promotion. Therefore, we do not recommend removal of his failure of selection.
5.       Point of contact is Major XXXX , (703) 000 - 0000 .


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

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2001 | 04072-00

    Original file (04072-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You again request that this fitness report be removed, and you add a new request for consideration by a special selection board for promotion to lieutenant colonel. petitioner alleges that senior officers, career counselors, and at least one monitor, him of fair consideration for command, promotion, and school selection. record and FYOl 0 and Subsequently, he Senior fitness requests removal of In our opinion, removing the petitioned report would have 3. significantly increased the...

  • 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 | CY1998 | 08224-98

    Original file (08224-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. 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. Subsequently, he unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the fitness report for the period 970125-970731 and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06373-06

    Original file (06373-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specifically concerning the contested section K of the fitness report for 2 September 2000 to 5 March 2001, the Board found the mark in section K.3, the second lowest of eight possible marks, did not require marking section K.2 (“Evaluation”) “Do Not Concur [with reporting senior].” The Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion from MMOA-4 in concluding your selection by the FY 2007 Major Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if the correction directed by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06678-06

    Original file (06678-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O370 -5100BJGDocket No: 6678-0617 November 2005This 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.You requested removing the fitness reports for 1 June 2004 to 9 May 2005 and 9 May to 30 June 2005, as well as your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.It...

  • 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 | 05821-01

    Original file (05821-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (?O/ MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR (PERB) R - I USMC ._ (b) MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 3 May 01 w/Ch l-4 Per MC0 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three members present, Majo the fitness report for the period 970801 to 980519 (CH) was requested. Reference (a) requested an advisory opinion in the case...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 07532-01

    Original file (07532-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV Y HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD OUANTICO, VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2001 2 +, SEP MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS...