DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O3701-5100

JSR
Docket No. 10212-07
25 January 2008

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.

You requested specified modifications of the fitness reports for 8 May to 31 July 1993, 9 September 1994 to 16 January 1995, 1 August to 1 November 1999, and 1 August to 12 November 2003. You also requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. After you had submitted your application, you also failed of selection by the FY 2009 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. It is presumed you desire removing that failure of selection as well.

Concerning the report for 1 August to 1 November 1999, you requested removing from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s (RO’s) comments) the sentences “He has valuable experience from prior MOS~ [military occupational specialty] billets that he needs to apply towards his current MOS.” and “His ground duties managerial/leadership aggressiveness needs to improve.” it is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CNC) has directed removing, from the first contested sentence, “that he needs to apply towards his current MOS” and has directed removing completely the second contested sentence.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulation 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, regulation and policies. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) in your case, dated 18 October 2007, and the advisory Opinion from HQMC, dated 1 November 2007, Copies of which are attached

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 report of the PERB and the advisory Opinion.

Specifically regarding the fitness report for 1 August to 12 November 2003, the Board expressly found that your request to add to section K.4, in accordance with the RO’s letter of 10 June 2007, the comment “Enthusiastically recommended for tactical command” should be denied. The Board noted that the RO’s letter stated he wanted that comment added to bring the fitness report into compliance with paragraph 4014.2.d. (1) (b) of Marine Corps Order (NCO) Pl610.7F (identical provision in the applicable directive (MCO Pl610.7E)). While the Board did find this provision would have permitted including such a comment, it did not find the provision required that comment.

The Board found the advisory opinion dated 1 November 2007, which recommended against removing your FY 2008 failure of selection to lieutenant colonel, to be equally applicable to your failure of selection by the FY 2009 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, before which you still had an uncorrected record, as the PERB did not consider your case until 3 October 2007, well after the FY 2009 promotion board had met on 5 September 2007.

In view of the above, your application for relief beyond that effected by CMC has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

While the Board voted not to modify the fitness report for 1 August to 12 November 2003, you may submit the RO’s letter to future selection boards.

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