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 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 1555-99
19 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, 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 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
3 March 1999, 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 PERB. They noted that since item 13b ("additional duties") of the
contested fitness report was marked "not observed," your reporting senior was not required to
identify any additional duties you may have had. Finally, the Board was not persuaded that
the report placed undue emphasis on your performance as an instructor. In view of the
above, 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
IEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
H E A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E CORPS
3280 R U S S E L L ROAD
QUANTICO. 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 w/Ch 1-6
DD Form 149 of 28 Dec 98
1. Per MCO 1610.11Bf the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 26 February 1999 to consider
Staff Sergean-
Removal of the fitness report for the period 931231 to 940920
(TR) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
petition contained in reference (a).
.
2. The petitioner contends the report is an inaccurate portrayal
of his performance and contains incorrect, inaccurate, and un-
justified statements. It is his position that the descriptive
title (Item 4a) is incorrect and should have reflected his per-
formance as the "LAV Supply Coordinator" -- a billet he filled
for approximately eight of the nine months covered by the evalu-
ation. He also challenges the consistency of the report and
believes that certain statements in Section C contradict some of
the assigned ratings in Section B. As a final matter, the peti-
tioner argues that the report was actually based on less than a
month of instructor duty and was not a fair assessment. To
support his appeal, the petitioner furnishes copies of Course
Completion Certificates, Instructor Evaluations, Instructional
Rating Forms, and four advocacy letters.
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. At the outset, the Board stresses that the disagreements
which the petitioner surfaces in reference (a) are the same basic
arguments raised in his official rebuttal statement. At the time
the report was reviewed by Lieutenant Colonel-
agreements were addressed and resolved, albeit in favor of the
Reporting Senior's overall evaluation. We do note, however, that
opined that the mark in Item 14f (force)
Lieutenant Colonel
"excellent" vice "above average ."
should reflect a
those dis-
Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY
SERGEANT
E CASE OF STAFF
USMC
b. Contrary to the petitioner's beliefs, the Board discerns
absolutely no inconsistency between any of the marks assigned in
Section B and the narrative comments in Section C. Likewise, we
find that the information contained in Item 4a corresponds with
the specific Table of Organization/Line Number information.
Again, that issue was commented on and adjudicated by Lieutenant
Colone
c. While the letters furnished with reference (a) are an
attempt to support the petitioner's arguments, the Board notes
that all four address his weakness as an instructor. That is
precisely what the challenged report documents.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff Sergeant
fficial military record.
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
valuation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00839-99
He unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Branch (PERB) to remove a Grade Change fitness report for the period 960801'to 970317. requests removal of his failure of selection on the FY99 USMC record and 3. ~ieutena-averall Value and Distribution contains two officers ranked above him and none below.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02227-99
The Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) reviewed the petition and denied the request. (3) This report also did not appear before the FY98 Board. e. Written comments by Reporting Seniors and Reviewing Officers.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01984-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 1999. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. c. While the petitioner may believe the report at issue has hindered her promotional opportunities, the Board is quick to point out that "non-competitive" and "adverse" are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03156-01
You also made new requests to remove your relief for cause from recruiting duty, which was requested on 5 April 1999; your nonjudicial punishment of 29 March 1999; and your service record page 11 counseling entries dated 17 and 24 February 1999. We are asked to provide an advisory opinion on Petitioner's request for the removal from his Service Record Book (SRB) and his official military personnel file (OMPF) of all references to his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 29 March 1999 and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01303-99
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 1610.11B, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 12 February 1999 to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00035-99
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 23 December 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...
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 | 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 | 02618-98
The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that your contested adverse fitness report should not be removed. Regardless, the report under Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY LIEUTENAN SE OF FIRST USMC consideration is the official report of record and the one to which the petitioner responded. (7) ~ajor- advocacy letter of 23 November 1998 claims he was not aware that the petitioner 'was involved...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02992-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report by completely eliminating the reviewing officer's certification. 'ARTMENT OF T H E NAVY HEADQUARTERS U N I T E D STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 R U S S E L L ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 1 3 4 - 5 1 0 3 1610 MAY - 3 1999 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOhtid FOR CORRECTION OF IN REPLY REFER TO: NAVAL RECORDS Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON...