DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
I
BJG
Docket No: 4272-01
29 June 2001
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 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.
the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board
23 May 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 report of the PERB.
(BLT) executive officer
(X0), at
Concerning the contested fitness report for 26 August to 18 December 1998, the Board found
the supporting statement from the battalion landing team
enclosure (4) to your application, did not refute the reporting senior’s comment to the effect
that you had to be “backstopped” by the battalion
reporting senior erred by stating you were counseled by himself, the
rather than the battalion S-3 officer alone. In this regard, they noted that the battalion S-l
officer who submitted the statement at enclosure (5) to your application would not necessarily
have been aware of all
the counseling you received. Further, counseling takes many forms,
so the recipient may not recognize it as such when it is provided. Finally, the Board found it
unobjectionable that the reporting senior stated, as a reason for relieving you, his expectation
that the BLT would suffer if you retained your duties; they likewise found it unobjectionable
that he mentioned the new duties and the new reporting senior you would have for the
following reporting period.
X0. They were unable to find that the
X0 and the S-3 officer,
Regarding the contested reviewing officer comments on the fitness report for
18 December 1998 to 17 June 1999, the Board was unable to find these comments reflected
bias against you formed during the previous period, nor could they find that the reviewing
offficer did not counsel you. To the extent these comments contrast with the reporting
senior’s comments or your other fitness reports, they found this does not establish that the
reviewing officer comments at issue were invalid.
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.
i 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
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
an official naval record, the
corr@ion of
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CO
D
3280 RUSSELL ROA
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA
22 134-5 103
R PS
IN
~NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06365-01
In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the 10 April 2001 from a Marine Corps lieutenant colonel (enclosure (6) to your application), did not persuade the Board that the remaining reviewing officer comments at issue were unjustified. 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. nor given a copy of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06721-00
t for the period 960914 to 970710 (TR) was Removal of Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive requested. evidenced in the final paragraph of enclosure (6) to reference REPORTING SENIORS HERE WILL BE (a) (i.e., "FITNESS REPORTS. THE FITNESS REPORTS.").
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06047-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 November 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 1 July 2001, a copy of which is attached. ons of the female captain not- ad a duty as an officer and a and as a Staff Platoon Commander at The Basic School, omments in Section K4 of the ntire situation in its He...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06835-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 28 August 2001, a copy of which is attached. matter is that Lieutenant Colonel Officer for the challenged fitness report. of the reporting period, The fact of the s not the Reviewing For the last 52 days his successor (Lieutenant Colonel Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08384-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 6 December 2001, a copy of which is attached. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation never officially counseled The petitioner contends he was 2. that his performance was or would result in an adverse fitness report. The Board believes Sub-j: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION 0 LIEUTENANT COLONEL OF SMC b.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08072-02
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. height, weight, and body fat as He was also not within established Marine Corps 73", 227 pounds, and The report at issue reflects the petitioner's weight standards for his 19%, Subi: J MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVIS SERGE E CASE OF STAFF USMC (PERB) respectively (over...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07545-01
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 September 2001, a copy of which is attached. applies Report A - 971122 to 980608 (CD) - Reference (c) Report B - 980609 to 980731 (DC) - Reference (d) Report C -...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08696-02
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06619-02
The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that the contested section K (reviewing officer (RO) marks and comments) of the fitness report for 1 June 2000 to 31 May 2001 should stand. 1 8 20~ 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 LIEUTENANT COLONEL USMC Ref: (a) (b) LtCo MC0 's DD Form...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08224-98
The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. 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. Subsequently, he unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the fitness report for the period 970125-970731 and...