DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

BJG
Docket No: 541 l-01
29 August 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 29 August 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 (HQMC) Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 10 July 2001, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC
Officer Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division 
25 July 2001, copies of which are attached. They also considered your rebuttal  letters dated
19 July and 8 August 2001 with enclosure.

(MMOA-4)) 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 in finding that your contested fitness report should stand. Since
they found no defect in your performance record, they had no basis to strike your failure by
the Fiscal Year 2002 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board or to recommend granting you
“promotion reconsideration. 
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

” In view of the above, your application has been denied. The

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

Enclosures

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

Y

HEADOIJARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 221 34-5103

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

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

USMC

(a) 
(b) 

Major DD Form 149 of 24 Apr 01
MC0 

P1610.7E

Per 

1.
with three members present,

MC0 

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

met on 3 July 2001 to consider Major

petition contained in reference (a).

Removal of the

fitness report for the period 981231 to 990731 (AN) was
requested.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.

The petitioner contends the report is neither a fair nor

2.
accurate assessment of his performance.
report conveys the impression that he did not perform to the
standards expected of a Major and renders his service in grade
less than competitive for promotion.
petitioner furnishes letters from the Reporting Senior and
Reviewing Officer of record.

It is his belief the

To support his appeal, the

In its proceedings,

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

the PERB concluded that the report is

a.

Not withstanding the advocacy letters from Colonel

Colonel

Johnson and Lieutenant
that the grades and comments on the challenged fitness report
reflect anything other than actual performance.
This is a
performance appraisal certified by the Reporting Senior as "true
and without prejudice or partiality" (Section  
in by the Reviewing Officer with "sufficient" observation
(Section 

,there is no substantiation

Jl) and concurred

Kl).

b.

In his letter, Colonel

is vague in implying the

at least from his perspective, prepared based "on

report was,
early Command guidance on the new PES."
withstanding, any fitness report should be prepared per the
applicable directive.
What is significant is that Colonel

That matter not

Subi:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)

ICATION  IN THE CASE OF MAJOR
USMC

:current assessment of the performance recorded in the

challenged fitness report is based
observation."
fitness report documents performance and accomplishments during
that finite period,

"on subsequent favorable
the Board stresses that any

and not on what subsequently occurred.

In this regard,

C . Lieutenant Colonel

letter merely reinforces the

honesty and fairness of his evaluation, and that it was in
Regardless of the
strict compliance with reference (b).
perceived competitiveness of the report, it is not adverse and
the Board discerns absolutely no injustice.

The Board's opinion,

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

based on deliberation and secret ballot

official military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

Marine Corps

Colonel,
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

2

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

Y

HEADGUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280 RUSSELL ROAD
 VIRGINIA 22134.51 0

GUANTICO,

3

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

BCNR PETITION FOR MA

Ref: 

(

USMC of 18 Jul 01

Recommend disapproval  

1.
his failure of selection.

o

e case of

request for removal of

Per the reference, we reviewed

2.
petition.
Lieutenant Colone
Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) denied his request
for removal of the Annual fitness report of 981231 to 990731.
Majo

equests removal of his failure of selection.

record and

Maj

iled selection on the FY-02 USMC

Subsequently, the

.+

record, as it appeared before
In our opinion,
3.
e, and provided a fair
the boards, was co
Had the petitioned report been
assessment of his performance.
removed, the record would have been   more competitive, but not
enough to warrant removal of the failure of selection.
the unfavorable   PERB action did not change the c
of the record, we recommend disapproval of Major
for removal of his failure of selection.

Since
ness
equest

4.

POC

Marine Corps

Head, Officer Assignment Branch
Personnel Management Division