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 DC 20370-5100
BTG
Docket No: 4431-99
5 August 1999
This is in reference to
provisions of title 10
r application for correction of your naval record pursuant to 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 5 August 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 7 July 1999, a copy of which is attached. They also considered your
rebuttal letter dated,26 July 1999 with enclosures.
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.
The Board noted that your reviewing officer (RO) acknowledged your additional duty as the
Japanese Officer Exchange Program Officer and your participation in the Amphibious
Warfare School Nonresident Program. They were unable to find that you were not counseled
concerning your performance during the reporting period, noting that your RO states he is
satisfied that your reporting senior (RS) did counsel you. In any case, they generally do not
grant relief on the basis of a lack of counseling, since counseling takes many forms, so the
recipient may not recognize it as such when it is provided. They likewise were unable to find
your expected standards were not defined. They could not conclude that your RO erred by
stating that the command's success in a Marine Corps Combat Readiness Evaluation was due
primarily to a gunnery sergeant, or in stating that the gunnery sergeant, rather than you,
authored the letter of instruction for the evaluation. They noted that your RO did not deny
you had received the training needed for this evaluation, but stated that you lacked the
requisite skills and experience. Finally, they found that the PERB properly treated your
report at issue as adverse, given your RS's comments.
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 c 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 1 3 4 - 5 1 0 3
,lg p ' i p L Y REFER TO:
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
USMC
Ref:
(a) Capta
(b) MCO P
s DD Form 149 of 15 Dec 98
Ch 1-5
Encl :
(1) Completed Fitness Report 980403 to 980731 (DC)
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 26 February 1999 to consider
apta aim petition contained in reference (a). Removal of
the fitness report for the period 980403 to 980731 (DC) was
requested. Reference ( b ) is the performance evaluation directive
governing submission of the report.
,
,
2. The petitioner contends the report fails to reflect/outline
his accomplishments during the reporting period and believes the
report does not comply with the provisions of reference (b). To
support his appeal, the petitioner furnishes his own statement,
results of a Commanding General's Inspection (CGI), and other
various forms of documentation which he believes supports his
appeal.
3. In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that:
a. The overall tenor of the Section C narrative, coupled
with the Reviewing Officer's comments that the petitioner
"...performs most duties adequately, warranted the petitioner's
signature in Item 24 and the opportunity to respond. Owing to
the relative recency of the report at the time the PERB first
considered reference (a) (i. e. , seven months) , the Board
concluded that referral at that time would be appropriate.
b. All referral action, to include third sighting by a
General Officer, has been accomplished. We specifically note
that the Reviewing Officer has dispelled any perception that the
petitioner's performance was anything other than as recorded/
evaluated by the Reporting Senior. In this regard, and
notwithstanding the documentation furnished in support of
reference (a), the Board discerns absolutely no error or
injustice. Likewise, the challenged fitness report does not
violate any of the provisions of reference (b).
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
CAPTAIN
USMC
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report, as reflected in the
enclosure, should remain a part of captai
military record.
official
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
colonel, U. S. Marine Corps
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04790-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PEW), dated 2 June 2003, a copy of which is attached. (6), concerning section A, item 8b (physical fitness test (PFT)) of the fitness report form, says "Use code 'NMED' [not medically qualified] if the MRO warine reported on] is unable to take or pass the PFT because of a physical (medical) condition." The "NMED" entry in Item 8b of the fitness report, whi.ch is further...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2003 | 05572-03
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 26 June 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board was unable to find the contested fitness report was given as a form of punishment.
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 | 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 | 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 | CY1999 | 01131-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 10 February 1999, a copy of which is attached. Per MCO 1610.11Bf the Performance Evaluation Review Board, ent, met on 4 February 1999 to consider with three membe Gunnery Sergeant Removal of the following fitness reports was requested: etition contained in reference (a). Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR...