D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 N A W ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20370-5100
SMC
Docket No: 05917-98
29 April 1999
Dear Serg
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-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 29 April 1999. 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 submi&d in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review
Board (PERB), dated 5 August 1998, a copy of which is 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 PERR. Accordingly, 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
2 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 203801776
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
5 Aug 98
Subi: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
2
ADVISORY
SERGEANT
IN THE CASE OF
USMC
Ref:
(a) Sergeant-
(b) MCO P1610.7D
DD Form 149 of 15 Jul 98
1. Per MCO 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 4 August 1998 to consider
Sergeant-petition
the fitness report for the period 960203 to 960213 (TD) was
requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive
governing submission of the report.
contained in reference (a). Removal of
2 . The petitioner's contention is that he believes the report is
unjust in that it covers a 11-day period and the Reporting Senior
did not have sufficient time to observe his performance.
3. In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a. The Board does not agree with the petitionerfs argument
that Major -did
not have sufficient time to observe
his performance. In this regard, the Board observes that prior
to &L t~ilding the four-week Sel y ; - ~ ~ l t ' s Course
completed a three-month evaluation of the pe
billet ("Directives Chief") . Consequently, he .had knowledge of
the petitioner's mission accomplishment/capabilities. In this
regard, we discern absolutely no error or injustice relative to
the short reporting period.
b. What serves to further substantiate/justify an observed
fitness report for this 11-day period is the adverse information
concerning the petitioner's lack of initiative/judgment regarding
a personal issue which affected his primary duties. The board
notes that in his rebuttal statement the petitioner accepted
responsibility for his actions and acknowledged his mistake.
c. As a final issue, reference (a)'contains absolutely no
documentary evidence to prove the petitioner's allegation that he
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
SERGEAN
USMC
was held accountable for his Section's poor performance during
his absence. Likewise, we find nothing to show precisely how the
petitioner may have rated more than what has been recorded.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is th
of Sergeant
ntested fitness report should remain a part
fficial military record.
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00211-99
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 report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 January 1999, a copy of which is attached. In his letter appended to reference (a), the Reporting Senior states that the Section C comments reflect a true...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02223-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report by removing the sentence "Sgt [your last name] balances work and a difficult situation in an unselfish and unswerving manner." In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 29 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner believes that the markings in Items 13c (administrative duties), 13e (handling...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01555-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. V I R G I N I A 22 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/ PERB MAR 3 1999 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF SERGEAY , USMC Ref: (a) SSgt- (b) MCO P1610.7C...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00030-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of your contested fitness report for 1 March to 30 September 1993. 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 warranting removal of the remaining contested fitness report, for 1 March 1991 to 26 April 1992. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08472-98
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 H E A - 4 U A R T L R S U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E CORPS 3 2 8 0 R U S S E...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04216-02
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report for 29 June to 5 September 2000 be modified by changing item 3a (occasion) from "CH" (change of reporting senior) to "TR" (transfer). This is especially germane given the contents of the report and the fact that the petitioner and these same two reporting officials had an already-established reporting history GUNNER- - (PERB) OF USMC and Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07511-98
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 22 February 1999, a copy of which is attached. Per MCO 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 12 February 1999 to consider Staff sergean- Removal of the fitness report for the period 971001 to 971231 (AN) was requested. His primary duty was that of a "recruiter" and the overall evaluation documents his performance in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 04431-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 July 1999, a copy of which is attached. They were unable to find that you were not counseled concerning your performance during the reporting period, noting that your RO states he is satisfied that your reporting senior (RS) did counsel you. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY h c A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07213-98
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested report by changing the mark in item 14a ("endurance") from "above average" to "not observed. " Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE N A W HEADQUARTERS U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E CORPS 3280 R U S S E L L ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 1 3 4 - 5 1 0 3 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 5 Oct 98 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL...
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...