D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y
BOARD FORCORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 N A W ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 1984-99
22 April 1999
Dear Staff Serg ..1IIc'
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 21 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
18 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 found that the narrative of your contested fitness report does
not reiterate your section B marks, nor is it unduly vague. They were unable to find that
your reporting senior did not counsel you on your performance before you received the
contested report. In any event, they generally do not grant relief on the basis of an alleged
absence of counseling, since counseling takes many forms, so the recipient may not recognize
it as such when it is provided. 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
EPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY
HEADQUARTERS U N I T E D STATES MARINE CORPS
3 2 8 0 R U S S E L L R O A D
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 134-5 1 0 3
1610
MMER/PERB
BAR 1 8.1999
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
IN REPLY REFER TO:
NAVAL RECORDS
Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
USMC
Ref:
(a) SSgt
(b) MCO P1610.7C w/Ch 1-6
DD Form 149 of 22 Jan 99
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 16 March 1999 to consider
Staff sergean-s
petition contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 920701 to 921026
(CH) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner contends that the comments in Section C fail
to "properly address" the marks in Section B and forces the
reader to "read between the lines" to comprehend the full meaning
of the evaluation. She also infers the report was utilized as a
"counseling tool" and believes it has played a major role in her
failure to be selected for promotion to the grade of gunnery
sergeant.
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. Contrary to the petitioner's assertions and arguments,
the Board does not discern any inconsistency between the ratings
assigned in Section B and the narrative comments in Section C.
While the verbiage in Section C is admittedly brief, that does
not negate the validity of the overall evaluation.
b. Although the petitioner states the report is not a fair
or accurate evaluation of her performance, reference (a) is
lacking any documentation that would show precisely how she
should have rated more than what has been recorded. To this end,
the Board concludes that the petitioner has failed to meet the
burden of proof necessary to establish either an error or an
injustice.
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 not
Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEANT
synonymous. It must be kept in mind that the adversity of any
performance evaluation lies within the recorded performance, not
in its impact on competitiveness.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that ,the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff ~er~ean+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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 05707-99
In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner's request to strike his failure of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this request has merit and warrants favorable action. Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness reports: Date of Report Re~ortinq Senior Period of Report 29 Jan 87 21 Oct 87 28...
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00955-00
The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that Report A should remain a part of Captain official military record. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps fitness report of 980117 to 980904. failures of selection. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Captain record and SMC Major he successfully petitioned the Duty fitness report of 940201 to 940731. requests removal of his failures of selection.
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 | 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...