DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 1049-18 

OCT 12 2018 


Dear 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions 
of title l0 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance 
with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved. 
Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your 
case based on the evidence of record. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Conection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 11 July 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel will 
be furnished upon request. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and 
policies. The Board also considered the enclosed advisory opinion (AO) fumished by Headquarter, 
Marine Corps (MMRP-50). 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered your desire to 
remove the failures of selection (FOS) you incurred by the FY 18 and FY 19 USMC Lieutenant 
Colonel Promotion Selection Boards. The Board considered your contention that a fitness report 11 
(FITREP) of yours was incorrectly submitted as a non-joint report, and the mistake was annotated in 
the Third Officer Sighter comments. You argued that the error has since been corrected and you 
believe you were at an unfair disadvantage on the FY 18 Promotion Selection Board because you 
were not considered part of the joint population. You further argued that per CJCSI l 330.02C, 
officers serving in joint billets "are expected, as a group, to be selected for promotion, at a rate not 
less than the rate for all officers in the same military service in the same grade and competitive 
category." 

In reaching its decision, the Board noted that your FITREP for the reporting period l July 2015 
31 May 2016, Section A, Item 3.c. (Type) was erroneously marked ''N" indicating normal peacetime 
reporting, and that the "N " was on your Master Brief Sheet (MBS). The 30S commented 
'[Petitioner's] billet is cun-ently being processed to reassign it to the Joint Duty Assignment List 
(JDAL) where it was accidentally removed due to an administrative oversight.' Section A, Item 3.c. 
was later changed to "J" indicating joint duty. Prior to the change, this FITREP was viewable by the 
FY 18 Promotion Selection Board when you failed to select. 

With regard to your contention that you were at an unfair disadvantage on the FY18 Promotion 
Selection Board because you were not considered part of the joint population, the Board noted that 
Joint Officer Matters (MMOA-3) is responsible for the overall administration, management, and 
oversight of Joint Officer Management and Joint Duty Assignments for the U.S. Marine Corps. 

MMOA-3 furnishes promotion selection boards with a list of officers who meet criteria requiring 
joint-duty identification. The Board also noted that you were filling a joint billet with the 
Department of State, and that is not a part of the required reports for the promotion boards. You had 
met the requirements for JQ Level II (9701) due to having at least 18 points of joint experience and 
JPME I (Command and Staff DEP). The statistics gathered for promotion boards include JQ Level 
Ill (9702) only and those currently serving in or that have served in JDAL billets with the Joint Staff, 
Office ofthe Secretary ofDefense and Headquarters Marine Corps (emphasis added). You were not 
yet a 9702 as you were attending       . Upon your graduation on 8 June 2018, you met the requirements 
for 9702 and have been submitted for approval for JQ Level III. 

Although the AO recommended the FY 18 and FY 19 FOSs be removed, stating that a precepted 
metric was incorrectly presented in your record at the time of the selection board and could have led 
to your FOS, the Board did not concur with the opinion. Specifically, the Board noted the FY 18 
Precept guidance: "When considering who is best qualified for promotion, the quality of performance 
of officers who have served in or are serving in joint duty assignments shall be given the same 
weight as quality of performance in assignments within the Marine Corps" (emphasis added). The 
Board determined that officers serving in joint duty billets are neither advantaged or disadvantaged 
on promotion selection boards, but receive the same weight regarding their quality of performance 
when being compared to other officers not serving in joint duty billets. In view of the foregoing, the 
Board concluded that the error on your FlTREP, and as reflected on your MBS was a harmless error, 
and not material error warranting removal of your FOSs. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at 
this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and 
material evidence. New evidence is evidence 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, 


Executive Director