D E P A R T M E N T OF T H E N A V Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D C. 20370-5100
SMC
Docket No: 00020-99
23 April 1999
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 22 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
28 December 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 ?bKb. Accordingly, your application has been clrtlied. The Iurllcs 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, i t 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
H E k . ,tJARTERS 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 - 5 103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/ PERB
DEC 2 8 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj :
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY
SERGEANT
IN THE CASE OF STAFF
USMC
NR
I
(a) SS~~-DD
Form 149 of 26 Oct 98
(b) MCO Pl6lO. 7D w/Ch 1-2 .
1. Per MCO 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 22 December 1998 to consider
Staff Sergeant
Removal of the
(CH) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
petition contained in reference (a).
report for the period 970101 to 970422
2. The petitioner contends there are inaccuracies and procedural
errors associated with the report. Specifically, he objects to
the length of time it took the Reporting Senior to complete the
report and provide counseling (49 days); that there are no
official Page 11 entries in his Service Record Book (SRB) to
indicate any counseling occurred, that the mark of "average" in
Item 141 (personal relations) is not consistent with Section C;
and that there are no Section C comments to substantiate the
markings of "below average" in Items 14c (military presence), 14i
(force), and 14j (leadership). To support his appeal, the
petitioner furnishes a copy of the report at issue and a copy of
a letter prepared by the Reporting Senior for the petitioner's
use before the FY98 Gunnery Sergeant Promotion Board.
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. While neither this Headquarters nor the PERB condone the
late processing/submission of fitness reports, that single fact
does not somehow invalidate an otherwise acceptable fitness
report. In this regard, we conclude that the Reporting Senior's
tardiness in completing the fitness report does not call into
question the fairness or accuracy of the overall evaluation.
b. 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. One is simply not dependent on the
other.
c. Contrary to the petitioner's arguments and assertions,
the marks in Section B are consistent with and complement the
narrative cowents in Section C. For example, the low marking in
"force" is substantiated by the statement concerning the
petitioner's passive nature. Likewise, the marks in "leadership"
and "military presence" are fully supported by the opening
sentence, to wit: "SSg-has
platoon sergeant because his military presence, force, and
personal example proved inadequate for the requirements of this
billet. "
been formally relieved as the
d. Captai
letter to the Promotion Board was authored
a full year after the ending date of the challenged fitness
report. It's purpose was not to invalidate or somehow call into
question the fitness report under consideration, but to endorse
the petitioner's advancement to the grade of Gunnery Sergeant.
e. The fact that the Third Sighting Officer (Colonel
may not have totally agreed with all of the markings
does not negate the report. What he goes on to say is that the
report " . . may be an accurate portrayal. . ." of what the
petitioner had done during the reporting period, but that it
should not be a "career terminator."
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff Sergean-~fficial
military record.
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01970-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) officer's comments from both reports. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Board (PERB), dated 16 March 1999, a copy of injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative reg 1 lations and procedures the members of the panel will be...
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 | CY2003 | 04233-03
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 7 May 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board was unable to find the contested fitness report was “B” used as a counseling document.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01371-99
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 24 February 1999, a copy of which is attached. They noted, in this regard, that you were permitted to submit a rebuttal, despite your initial declination; that the...
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 | CY2003 | 02430-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. V I R G I N I A 22 1 3 4 - 9 1 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB MAR 1 8 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISOR SERGEAN HE CASE OF STAFF SMC Ref: (a) SSgt (b) MCO P1610.7E DD Form 149 of 30 Dec 02 1. 'CH"...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05106-99
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. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY H E A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D S T A T E S M A R I N E C O R P S 3280 RUSSELL R O A D Q U A N T I C O , V I R G I N I A 22 134-5 1 0 3 IN R E P L Y R E F E R TO: 1610 MMER/PERB MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00130-99
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. S u b j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) HE CASE OF USMC The case is forwarded for final action.
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 | CY2001 | 02721-01
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. The Board found the incident cited, described by your service record page 11 counseling entry, the reporting senior and the third sighting officer as “minor,” was nevertheless important enough to warrant mention in the contested fitness report. Reference fitness report for the period 971101...