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