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 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20370-5100
SMC
Docket No: 072 13-98
16 April 1999
Dear Staff 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. You requested removal of a
fitness report for 15 July to 31 December 1995.
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. "
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 15 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 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 5
October 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 warranting removal of the complete contested report. In this connection, the Board
substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. 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.
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 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 RECORDS
Sub j :
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISOR
SERGEAN
THE CASE OF STAFF
USMC
Ref:
(a) ssgt.-
(b) MCO ~ 1 6 1 0 . 7 ~
DD Form 149 of 9 Jul 98
1. Per MCO 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 30 September 1998 to consider
Staff Sergeant
s petition contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 950715 to 951231
(AN) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner contends the report is unjust due to the
"above average" mark in Item 14a (endurance). To support his
appeal, the petitioner furnishes his own statement, copies of
other fitness re
record, Captain
and a letter from the Reporting Senior of
3. In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that:
a. Based on the statement from Captain-
the PERB is
thoroughly convinced that the mark of "above average" in Item 14a
was based entirely on the petitioner's low physical fitness test
(PFT) score.
b. Unfortunately, the Reporting Senior continues to mis-
interpret the basis for assigning an observed mark in Item 14a.
Justification for such a mark is not, as he infers, PFT results.
To this end, the Board does not agree that the mark should be
elevated to " . . . at least excellent maybe outstanding" (last
sentence in paragraph three of Captain
letter of 1 Jul
98). Instead, the Board has directed the mark in Item 14a to be
changed to "not observed." They do not agree that the entire
report is suspect and should be eliminated.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report, as modified, should
remain a part of Staff Sergean
record. The limited correctiv
3b is considered sufficient.
s official military
identified in subparagraph
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
PPLICATION ... IN THE CASE OF STAFF
-SMC
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 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 11_34_27 CDT 2000
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.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 1999. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Sep 27 14_25_51 CDT 2000
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.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 1999. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08343-98
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report by changing the entry in item 5a from "NNNMED" (rifle. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 November 1998, a copy of which is attached. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00020-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 28 December 1998, a copy of which is attached. The Board is quick to point out that performance counseling and the official recording of counseling sessions via Page 11 SRB entries are separate and distinctly different Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISOR SERGEAN N THE CASE OF STAFF SMC administrative actions. What he goes on to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02
Report A - 990827 to 991231 (AN). Report C - 000630 to 001231 (AN). Evaluation Review Board, request for May 2002 to consider Staff removal of his fitness report for the period 010101 to 010209 Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive (CH).
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 | 01967-99
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. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members resent, met on 16 March 1999 to consider Staff Sergean A t i t i o n contained in reference (a). Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
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 | 02525-99
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. 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. Per MCO l6lO.llC, the Performance Evalu,~tion Review Board, with three members present, met on 9 April 1999 to...
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...