DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAWANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
~USMC
BJG
Docket No: 2633-99
20 May 1999
Dear Staff ~
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.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified your contested
fitness report for 15 May 1997 to 4 January 1998 by correcting the beginning date from
15 May to 8 March 1997.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 19 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.
the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated
16 April 1999, a copy of which is attached.
In addition, the Board considered the report of
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 your fitness report at issue is not an “extended”
report, in that it does not reflect that your evaluation in a prior report remained valid. They
found that you are correct that you should have received a “DC” (directed by the
Commandant of the Marine Corps) report for 8 March to 7 May 1997. However, they did
not consider this a material error warranting corrective action.
a favorable report for 8 May 1997 to 4 January 1998 could not offset the harmful effect of
your nonjudicial punishment, which must be documented in any event. Further, they noted
that a “DC” report might well be viewed unfavorably by reviewers of your record.
In view
of the above, your application for relief beyond that effected by CMC has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
In this regard, they found that
4.
(;‘3~3-qq
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
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/ PERB
APR16 1999
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEANT ~
flIjII~~~USMC
(a) SSgtJ~~
(b) MCO P1610.7D w/Ch 1-4
DD Form 149 of 11 Feb 99
Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
~1s petition contained in reference (a)
itness report for the period 970515 to 980104
1.
with three members present, met on 14 April 1999 to consider
Staff Sergeant
Removal of the
(TD) was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.
Headquarters effected action to change the beginning date of the
report to “970308”; documentation contained in the Official
Military Personnel File (OMPF) and the Master Brief Sheet (MBS)
reflects this modification.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
NOTE:
This
The petitioner contends the report is procedurally and
2.
factually incorrect and cites those areas in reference (b) which
he believes have been violated.
In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is
3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
written and filed.
The following is offered as relevant:
a.
The fitness report of record was the only report sub-
mitted to this Headquarters, and is therefore the “official”
evaluation for the period covered.
be considered a “draft” and has no validity.
Any other prior version must
b.
In the petitioner’s rebuttal to the challenged report, he
acknowledged the incident and took full responsibility for his
actions.
attempt in reference (a) to obviate the seriousness of the
incident by challenging the tenets of the system utilized to
record such situations.
The Board views with great concern the petitioner’s
c.
Subsequent to the processing of the fitness report by
this Headquarters, it was discovered by the reporting officials
that the beginning date was in error.
tion was effected and the report is correctly reflected as
“970308 to 980104.”
An administrative correc-
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERE)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLI
SERGE~~1W~~
TION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
USMC
d.
That the petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), and that he acknowledged his
responsibility, is not a matter for debate.
and the reporting officials were aware of the incident when the
report was submitted.
wrong beginning date is not an invalidating factor.
The inadvertent error in~assigningthe
Both the petitioner
e.
There is no substantiation that the Reporting Senior
avoided submitting a “Directed by the Commandant (DC)” report
upon the petitioner’s conviction at NJP (i.e., a second
alcohol-related incident) .
almost eight years ago, there is no reason to believe the
Reporting Senior was aware; he did not maintain the petitioner’s
Service Record Book (SRB) and would have had no reason to check
it prior to completing the fitness report at issue.
Since the first incident occurred
The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
4.
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff ~
official military record.
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
• Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
2
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 | CY2001 | 04072-00
You again request that this fitness report be removed, and you add a new request for consideration by a special selection board for promotion to lieutenant colonel. petitioner alleges that senior officers, career counselors, and at least one monitor, him of fair consideration for command, promotion, and school selection. record and FYOl 0 and Subsequently, he Senior fitness requests removal of In our opinion, removing the petitioned report would have 3. significantly increased the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01250-99
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN COLONEL (2) Standard Addendum Page 1 of 9 (Frame Ell, 04 Fiche). attachments to fitness reports, other reference (b). 4. vote, remain a part of Colonel limited corrective actions through is that the contested fitness report, as modified, should 3a(7) are considered sufficient.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07245-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report for 17 April to 31 December 1999 by changing the beginning date to 18 June 1999, and adding “MRO [Marine reported on] attended and completed Joint Aviation Supply Maintenance Management Course. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 September 2001, a copy of which is attached. require a mandatory...
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 | CY2001 | 04368-01
request for the By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at (3), this Headquarters provide encl ith Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY ,._iDQUARTERS UNITLD STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2 1 MAY 2001 From: To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C Per the reference, 1. has reviewed allegations of error and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00379-02
You requested removal of your fitness reports for 1 March to 28 August 1998 and 1 October to 14 November 1998, as well as documentation of your relief for the good of the service from recruiting duty. ” CMC also “Recruited SNM was put on bed rest/no duty due to pregnancy problems/back problems. (2), the approval authority (GOS) relief from recruiting duty, has supports her request for Additionally, enclosure Based upon this review, 2. following errors require corrective action.
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 | CY2001 | 04998-00
Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 161 0 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF USMC SERGEAN (a) (b) SSgt. VIRGINIA 22134-5103 NAVY IN REPLY REFER TO: 107 0 .MI MEMORANDUM FOR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04534-01
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official In this records. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure : DEPART h&ADQUARTERS QUANT M ENT OF THE NAVY UN 3280 I CO ITED STATES RUSSELL ROAD I RG I N I A , V 22 134 CORP S MAR -5 I NE 103 : REPLY REFER TO I N 1610 MMER/PERB 2001 ; JON 1 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: Encl: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...