Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02742-01
Original file (02742-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SMC
Docket No: 02742-01
28 June 2001

SMC

Dear Serg

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 28 June 2001. 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 
29 March 2001, a copy of which is attached.

(PERB), dated

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 
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

PERIL Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and

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.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official

In this

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

I

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280  RUSSELL ROAD
  22 

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA

134-S  103

IN REPLY REFER TO:
161 0
MMER/PERB
9 MAR 
2 

2031

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISOR
SERGEAN

(a) 
(b) 

Sergea
MC0 

P1610.7E

s DD Form 149 of 8 Jan 01

Per 

MC0 

1.
with th
Sergean
Removal of the following fitness reports was requested:

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board.
resent, met on 28 March 2001 to consider
petition contained in reference (a).

a.

b.

Report A  

- 990217 to 990331  

(AN)

Report B  

- 990522 to 990618  

(TR)

Reference 
the submission of both reports.

(b) is the performance evaluation directive governing

The petitioner argues that the two reports are out of

Consequently, he believes they do

2.
sequence and over-lapping.
not belong on his record.

In its proceedings,

the PERB concluded that the error was in

3.
the "from" dates on the petitioner's fitness reports for the
periods 990216 to 990521 (CH) and 990521 to 000331 (AN).
Personnel Management Support Branch (MMSB) of this Headquarters
has effected the necessary modifications to the database and
inserted memoranda onto the petitioner's official military
personnel file identifying the errors and subsequent
corrections.

The

Sergea

The Board's opinion,

4.
based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness reports should remain a part
of 
change made to the  
paragraph two (now 990401-990521 and  
petitioner's record is chronologically accurate.

With the
"from" dates on the reports identified in

fficial military record.

990619-000331),  the

c

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCN
SERGEAN

E CASE OF

MC

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04711-01

    Original file (04711-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 June 2001, 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 injustice. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation etition contained in reference (a).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08259-01

    Original file (08259-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 November 2001 with enclosure, the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIFD), dated 11 December 2001 with enclosure, and the memorandum for the record dated 23 January 2002, copies of which are attached. The following comments/opinions concerning the page 11 entry 6 . on the Marine's grade, experience, position,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08332-01

    Original file (08332-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 January 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 26 November 2001, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08637-01

    Original file (08637-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive Your allegations of error and session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 13 December 2001, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, W....

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05117-01

    Original file (05117-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 1 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except they noted that in addition to the third...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05588-01

    Original file (05588-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    consisted of your application, naval record considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Removal The petitioner contends that the report on file in his 2. official military record is different from the one he acknowledged and signed; that changes were made without his To support his appeal, the petitioner furnishes knowledge. counsel and discuss the s in possession of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03138-01

    Original file (03138-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed amendment of the contested fitness report to reflect you were the subject of a meritorious mast. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 April 2001, a copy of which is attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06691-01

    Original file (06691-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found the reviewing officer permissibly referred to matters outside the reporting period in question, in order to reply to issues you raised in your rebuttal to the contested fitness report. 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. As an adverse fitness report, the petitioner was afforded his rightful opportunity to acknowledge and respond...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04559-01

    Original file (04559-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation etition contained in reference (a). removal of the report is simply not Even if he had, Unless and until that action is set aside or the Board is haste the Board Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVISORY SERGEANT HE CASE...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08696-02

    Original file (08696-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 September 2002, a copy of which is attached. and it is 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 The petitioner states the challenged report is "undeserved", 2. yet provides no statement...