DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
SMC
Docket No: 06220-01
29 November 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 November 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this 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 3 August 2001, a copy of which is attached.
Documentary material considered by the Board
Your allegations of error and
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
7 August 1996, the Board was unable to find you were not guilty of the offense for which
(NJP) reflected in that report. In this regard, they
you received the nonjudicial punishment
noted that the reviewing, officer stated you made a plea of guilty, and they observed that you
did not appeal the NJP. 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.
PERIL Concerning the contested fitness report for 10 January to
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
,EPART
MENT
HEADQUARTERS UNITED
THF NAV
,OF
STATES MARINE CORPS
Y
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134 -5103
IH REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
2001
3 AU6
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON
BCNR APPLICATION
IN THE CASE OF STAFF
(a)
(b)
(c)
SSgt
MC0
MC0
P1610.7D
DD Form 149 of 5 Apr 01
Ch 1-6
w/Ch 1
1610.11C,
Per
MC0
1.
with three m
Sergean
Staff
Removal of th
the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
met on 1 August 2001 to consider
t,
petition
itness reports was requested:
contained in reference
(a)
-
a.
b.
Report A
- 920718 to 921102 (TR)
- Reference
(b) applies
Report B
- 960110 to 960807 (TD)
- Reference
(c) applies
Concerning Report B,
The petitioner contends the evaluation contained in Report A
2.
was based solely on the last four months vice the full 12
months.
attempt to defraud the government and infers the nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) was unfair.
petitioner furnishes his own statement, several items of
documentary evidence,
the petitioner states he did not
and third party statements.
To support his appeal, the
In its proceedings,
3.
administratively correct and procedurally complete as written
and filed.
The following is offered as relevant:
the PERB concluded that both reports are
a.
The Board is not sure to what the petitioner is
referring when he indicates Report A only reflects the last four
t%e the entire 12
months of the reporting period as opposed
months.
Report A documents the petitioner's performance for
slightly less than the final four months of his tour with the
Inspector-Instructor Staff, Augusta, Georgia.
what the report should have reflected
That the petitioner believes he rated more than what has been
recorded has not been borne out by the documents included with
reference (a).
-- nothing more or less.
That is precisely
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEANT
SMC
b.
Report B correctly records the imposition of NJP, and in
constitutes neither an error nor an injustice.
this regard,
Whatever impact the continuing presence of Report B may have on
the petitioner's career progression is not germane in
determining if it should remain within his official record. In
this regard,
the Board emphasizes that it cannot and does not
operate under the premise that administratively correct and
factually accurate fitness reports should be removed simply to
enhance promotional competitiveness.
The Board's opinion,
based on deliberation and secret ballot
4.
vote, is that the contested fitness reports should remain a part
of Staff
official military record.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00224-01
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. ::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 | 05819-01
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 | 04558-01
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 | 08257-01
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 | 06847-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 August 2001, a copy of which is attached. Finally, as stated by the PERB, the contested fitness report and your extension on active duty were separate administrative actions; and while the reporting senior did recommend approval of your extension, he did so without making any further comment. Reference (b) is the performance .L.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07986-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 October 2001, a copy of which is attached. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation met on 10 October Sergean The petitioner contends the comments made by both th 2 .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04998-00
Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 161 0 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF USMC SERGEAN (a) (b) SSgt. VIRGINIA 22134-5103 NAVY IN REPLY REFER TO: 107 0 .MI MEMORANDUM FOR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03738-02
petitioner's assignment to the Military Appearance Program was correctly included on the fitness reports. As with Report A, the adversity of Report B was that he was assigned to the Military Appearance Program. rmance Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 MEMORANDUM FOR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00200-01
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 | 08165-00
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...