Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02974-01
Original file (02974-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
;A/’

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

SMC
Docket No: 02974-01
26 July 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 26 July 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.
the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board 
10 April 2001, a copy of which is attached.

In addition, the Board considered the report of

(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 PERB.

The Board found the reporting senior’s comments adequately supported the marks assigned in
the contested fitness report. They did not find his comments to contradict themselves. They
were unable to find that block 18 was incorrectly marked to show the report was based on
“daily” observation, noting observation need not be direct. They noted that the platoon
commander’s counseling (enclosure (2) to your application) stated your noncommissioned
officer skills were outstanding “except for your tact and judgment,” adding “you need to
work on when too [sic] voice your opinion. 
(3) to your application did not persuade the Board that the contested fitness report was
erroneous or unjust.

” Finally, the supporting statements at enclosure

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 THE NAV

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280  RUSSELL ROA

D

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22

  134-5 103

Y

IN  REPLY  REFER TO:

161 0
MMER/PERB
10 

APR 

2001

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS   PERFO RMAN CE  E VALUAT IO N REVIEW  
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION
SERGEANT

MC

IN THE CASE OF

BOARD 

(PERB)

(a) Sergeant
(b) 

MC0 

P1610.7D  

DD Form 149 of 22 Jan 01

w/Ch l-4

Per 

MC0 

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

1.
with three members present,
Sergean
of the fitness report for the period 971107 to 980330 (TR) was
requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

etition contained in reference (a).

(b) is the performance evaluation

met on 4 April 2001 to consider

Reference 

Removal

The petitioner contends the report is both inaccurate and

2.
unjust in its appraisal of his performance and potential. To
support his appeal,
and copies of his rebuttals and counseling documents.

the petitioner furnishes his own statement

In its proceedings,

3.
exception, the report is both administratively correct and
procedurally complete as written and filed.
offered as relevant:

the PERB concluded that, with one minor

The following is

a.

In his statement appended to reference (a), the

statement detailing his disagreement with

petitioner has done nothing more than provided another, yet
albeit more detailed,
the report.
The Re
(Lieutenant Colonel
performance was as documented by the Reporting Senior and that
his own familiarity with the circumstances concerning the
counseling caused him to dismiss the petitioner's inference that
it was related to or in retaliation for his request mast. In
this regard,
injustice.

cer/Battalion  Commander
firmed that the petitioner's

the Board discerns absolutely no error or

b.

Even if a "personality conflict" did exist, it is not,

in and of itself, grounds for relief.
responsibility of the junior to accommodate the requirements of

It is the duty and

Subj:

CORPS 

MA RINE 
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION
SERGE

PERFORMANCE  EV AL UA T IO N REVI E W BO A RD 

(PERB)

IN THE CASE OF

USMC

the senior unless and until the senior's actions exceed the
bounds of professional conduct.
this particular case.

There is no such showing in

C .

Although not an issue surfaced by the petitioner, the

Board notes that the report has not been Third Sighted.
the Reviewing Officer did not add any new or additional adverse
material to which the petitioner needed to respond, the Board
finds that conducting an administrative third sighting review
will suffice.
Personnel Management Support Branch (MMSB-30).

This action is being accomplished by the

Since

The Board's opinion,

4.
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of 
official military record.
corrective action identified in subparagraph  
sufficient.

based on deliberation and secret ballot

3c is considered

The limited

Sergean

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07130-01

    Original file (07130-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed fitness report for 1 October 1998 to 19 April 1999 be amended by adding officer’s Addendum Page dated 26 June 2001. that the contested the third sighting A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB),...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03751-00

    Original file (03751-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the memorandum for the record be filed in your official record stating name, grade and title of the third sighting officer. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280RUSSELLROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 TO: IN REPLY REFER 1610 MMER/PERB 2 4 MAY 2008 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Sub-i: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00200-01

    Original file (00200-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2001. 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. , DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103 REFER TO: IN...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07010-01

    Original file (07010-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 September 2001, a copy of which is attached. The Board noted that the contested “CD” (change of duty) fitness report does not indicate you were relieved for cause. Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MASTER SERGEANT USMC factors adversely affected the petitioner's performance and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06988-01

    Original file (06988-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 September 2001, a copy of which is attached. (G-2 Current some type of on-going the Board stresses In this regard, Additionally, Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINIO MASTER SERGEANT C are the comments by both the Reporting and more significant, Senior and Reviewing Officer concerning the petitioner's disregard of the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05819-01

    Original file (05819-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2001. 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 20 July 2001, a copy of which is attached. Simply stated, this is a matter of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08285-01

    Original file (08285-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 13 November 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. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure ..: Y EPARTMENT OF THE NAV HEADGUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05330-01

    Original file (05330-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 2 NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS DEPARTMENT OF THE 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1070 MIFD 'AUG 0 i,jbi I, MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF SERGEANT SMC application with supporting documents has been reviewed concerning his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07837-00

    Original file (07837-00.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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board 2000, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director _- Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03057-01

    Original file (03057-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report be amended by changing the beginning date from 27 February to 13 April 1996. They found the reviewing officer had no duty to direct the reporting senior to revise or remove those of his comments which rendered the report adverse, but he correctly ensured that you were afforded your rights regarding adverse fitness reports. This includes, but is certainly not limited to, Had there been...