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 DC 20370-5100
SMC
Docket No: 02794-99
27 May 1999
Dear Staff sergeafilQDIOC
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 27 May 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. Ih addition, the Board considered the report of
the Headquarters Marine corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated
25 April 1999, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 17 May 1999.
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. From their review of the narrative of the contested fitness report,
the Board found no unacceptable comment on inexperience. They were unable to find the
reporting senior did not provide you performance counseling. 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. Finally, the
Board noted that the report at issue need not be consistent with reports for other periods. 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
DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY
h, AQUARTERS 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
I N R E P L Y R E F E R TO:
1610
MMERDERB
APR 2 5 1999
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF SERGEANTNUSMC
Ref:
(a) S
(b) MCO P1610.7C w/Ch 1-5
~
S
Form 149 of 7 Mar 99
~
D
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 21 April 1999 to consider
Staff ~ergea-petition
contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 900105 to 910228
(AN) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner contends that the report is administratively
in error, does mot comply with the provisions of reference (b),
and contains adverse/derogatory comments in the Section C
narrative. To support his appeal, the petitioner furnishes his
own detailed statement, copies of the report at issue and his
Master Brief Sheet, a copy of a Letter of Commendation, and
extracts from his Service Record Book (SRB).
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 petitinner's 3rq11rnents and assertions,
the report neither violates any of the provisions of reference
(b), nor does it contain any marks/comments that are adverse.
That the petitioner believes otherwise is simply his interpreta-
tion of reference (b) vice the actual tenets of thatdirective.
Simply stated, the petitioner's objections equate to his opinion
of his performance versus that of the Reporting Senior.
b. The Certificate of Commendation at enclosure (3) to
reference (a), while complimentary, documents performance subse-
quent to the end of the reporting period at issue. Consequently,
it is simply not germane to the situation. Additionally, the
absence of documented counseling entries in the SRB (enclosure
(4) to reference (a)) does not somehow prove the petitioner did
not receive some type of performance counseling. In this regard,
the Board emphasizes that official SRB counseling entries and
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
CASE OF STAFF
performance counseling/feedback are two separate and distinct
administrative actions. One is not dependent on the other.
c. Notwithstanding the petitioner's statement and his belief
that the report is inaccurate, unjust, and inconsistent, there
has been absolutely no documentary evidence whatsoever to
substantiate his arguments. To the end, the Board concludes that
the petitioner has failed to meet the burden of proof necessary
to establish the existence of either an error or injustice.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff ~
military record.
e
a
e
~
r
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 | 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 | 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 | 00023-99
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 18 December 1998 to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00230-99
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 11 January 1999, a copy of which is attached. Certainly poor management of his supply account, as concluded in the investiga- tion and correctly recorded by the...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 01983-99
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 18 March 1999, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02956-99
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. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.