Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04564-01
Original file (04564-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X

2 NAVY ANNE

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

S

SMC
Docket No: 04564-01
25 October 2001

Dear Staff 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 25 October 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 

(PERB), dated 4 June 2001, a copy of which is attached.

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 that your more favorable recruiter fitness report for 1 March to
30 November 1997, from a different reporting senior, did not invalidate the contested report.
They were unable to find you were not counseled.
In any event, they generally do not grant
relief on the basis of an alleged absence of counseling, since counseling takes many forms,
so the recipient may not recognize it as such when it is provided. They noted the reporting
senior acknowledged that your duties as noncommissioned officer in charge slightly impaired
your performance of your regular duties as a recruiter. They found no inconsistency
between the “BA” (below average) mark in item 14f (“initiative”) and the comment to the
effect that you put forth obvious effort every day. They were unable to accept your
assessment of the basis for the “BA” mark in item 14m (“economy of management”).
Finally, they did not find the 
mark in item 15 (“general value to the service”).

mb’re favorable marks in other areas contradicted the “BA”

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 

dF THE  

NAVY

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280  RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO,  VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
4 JUN 

2001

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION
SERGEANT

ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF

SMC 

JR.

-

(a) 
(b) 

SSgt
MC0 

P1610.7D  

DD Form 149 of   13 Mar 01

w/Ch l-4

Per 

MC0 

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

1.
with three members present,
Sergeant
of the f
was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

etition contained in reference (a).
rt for the period 980101 to 980406 (CH)
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation

met on  31  May  2001 to consider Staff
Removal

The petitioner contends that the report is substantially

2.
inaccurate or unjust based on the short reporting period and the
circumstances he narrates in his statement.
appeal, the petitioner furnishes a copy of the challenged
fitness report and his own statement.

To support his

In its proceedings,

3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
The following is offered as relevant:
written and filed.

the PERB concluded that the report is

a.

In the petitioner's statement included with reference

(a), he raises the same basic issues and disagreements he
Colon
surfaced in his official statement of rebuttal.
the District Director and Reviewing Officer, succinctly
adjudicated the report and indicated the petitioner's recruiting
results were below acceptable standards.

b.

Although the petitioner denies any type of counseling,

the Board finds nothing to support that allegation.
there has been nothing proferred to show the report is anything
evaluation of the
other than a fair, accurate, and objective
In this
period.
petitioner's performance during the stated
has failed to meet
regard, the Board concludes the petitioner
the existence of
the burden of proof necessary to establish
either an error or an injustice.

Likewise,

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEANT

MC

The Board's opinion,

4.
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff 

based on deliberation and secret ballot

Sergea

ficial  military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

ormance

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 | 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 | 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 | 08257-01

    Original file (08257-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 1 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. MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04558-01

    Original file (04558-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. 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. MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 23 Jan 01 w/Ch 1-4 Per MC0 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three members Sergean of the fitness report for the period 970101 to 971231 (AN) was requested.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06220-01

    Original file (06220-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 3 August 2001, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05305-01

    Original file (05305-01.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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 July 2001, and the memorandum for the record dated 2 August 2001, copies of which are attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08165-00

    Original file (08165-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has amended the contested report for 19 September 1997 to 28 February 1998 by removing the reviewing officer’s comments. 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. The Board agrees with the petitioner concerning the Reviewing Officer's comments included with Report B. not, however, find that complete removal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00224-01

    Original file (00224-01.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. ::I MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISOR SERGEAN THE CASE OF STAFF ,USMC (a) (b) (c) SSgt. appeal, the petitioner furnishes his own statement detailing his perception of the...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 02724-01

    Original file (02724-01.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. 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. petitioner furnishes a letter from Master Gunnery Sergeant a copy of the challenged fitness report, and his own...