DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 4892-10
28 March 2011
This is in reference to yo
naval record pursuant to te
United States Code, section 1552.
You requested special selection board (SSB) consideration for
the Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 through 2001 Marine Corps Reserve
(Active Reserve) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards or, in the
alternative, promotion to lieutenant colonel with the date of
rank and effective date you would have been assigned, had you
been promoted pursuant to selection by the FY 1997 promotion
board. Finally, you impliedly requested that your retired
grade be changed accordingly, from major to lieutenant colonel.
In your previous case, docket number 3738-00, your request for
SSB consideration was denied on 10 August 2000. In accordance
with the direction of the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia, this request was reconsidered.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
h 2011. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicab
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, and the Board’s files on
docket numbers: 1483-96, 154-98, 5693-98,
your prior cases (
The Board also considered the advisory
7291-98 and 3738-00).
rine Corps Promotion Branch
and the MMPR electronic mail
copies of which
opinion from the Headquarters Ma
(MMPR), dated 15 November 2010,
4ons dated 22 and 23 February 2011,
the Board considered your counsel's
mber 2010 and 9 March 2011 with
transmiss
are attached. Finally,
rebuttal letters dated 8 Dece
enclosures.
ntious consideration of the entire
hat the evidence submitted was
existence of probable material
d was unable to find any error or
injustice in its previous conclusion that your “consideration
by the next regular promotion board with a complete record, and
status as not having failed of selection, will afford [you]
adequate relief.” The Board noted that under title 10, United
States Code, section 628, granting SSB consideration to an
officer who has been considered and not selected by a regular
promotion board is discretionary. The Board recognized that
the FY 1997 promotion board precept included language designed
to enhance the compgtitiveness of minority members, such as
yourself, while the precept for the FY 2002 promotion board,
the first to consider you after your record had been corrected,
did not; and that the overall in-zone selection rate for the FY
1997 board was 72.2 percent, while that for the FY 2002 board
was 69 percent, somewhat lower. However, the Board
particularly noted that your fitness report record before the
FY 2002 board, convened on 9 January 2001, included years more
evaluation of your performance than did the FY 1997 board,
convened on 2 April 1996, a factor very much to your advantage.
Although neither the FY 2002 nor 2003 regular promotion board
selected you after your record had been corrected, the Board
still felt your consideration by the regular promotion board
with a corrected record provided you a fair and equitable
remedy for the injustice it had found in your case. The Board
was unable to find you would have been promoted to lieutenant
colonel, absent your having been selected by any board for
promotion to that grade.
After careful and conscie
record, the Board found t
insufficient to establish the
error or injustice. The Boar
the Board again voted to deny relief.
the panel will be
he circumstances of your case are such
e taken. You are entitled to
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
It is regretted that t
that favorable action cannot b
have the Board reconsider its
2
official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive DWe a0
Enclosures
= to:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052779C070420
The applicant states, in effect, error of improper instructions to the promotion boards and an illegible microfiche presented to the boards seriously prejudiced him, resulting in material unfairness and denied rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. He further states that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should grant relief in the form of reconsideration for promotion to COL by SSB’s, and rewriting paragraph G-4(3) in the instructions...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00764-00
Pursuant to reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing his failure by the Fiscal Year requested that his 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 by the FY 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY Selection Board. d. In...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06104-02
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 | CY1999 | 08387-97
The fact that the MMOA-4 advisory opinion dated 29 November 1995 did not compare your record with a sampling of records of your peers from the FY 1996 Major Selection Board. In your previous case, you requested removal of your failures by the FY 1996 and 1997 Major Selection Boards, and remedial consideration for promotion. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C. 20350-1000 15 February 2000 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063912C070421
Other than his contention, the applicant has provided no evidence that the promotion selection board failed to perform its duties of selecting the best qualified officers for promotion regardless of race, gender or national origin. It does not appear to the Board that there was a material error in his records as they were considered by the FY 99 promotion board. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by submitting the applicant’s records to a duly...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06189-00
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command, dated 22 November 2000, 15 February and 11 June 2001, and the Medical Corps Officer Community Manager dated 26 April 2001, copies of which are attached.The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 17 April and 18 September 2001. evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. However, this evidence, by itself, did not establish...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08224-98
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 | CY1999 | 03152-99
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 Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, vice the FY 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. He...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08299-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BJG Docket No: 8299-01 13 February 2003 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 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 that he was not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01285-00
We have reviewed the subject application and cannot support Major equest for removal of failures of selection (FOS) status with provision of the following opinions: While the Marine Corps Reserve Support Command (MCRSC) s stated that his failure to receive igibility for promotion consideration by the a. Ma notificat FY99 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board adversely impacted the timeliness of his submission and was instrumental in his subsequent non-selection. (b) makes it clear that...