Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06363-01
Original file (06363-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

BJG
Docket No: 6363-01
14 September 2001

SMCR

Dear

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 13 September 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 10 August 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. Accordingly, 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
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard,
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

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.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

Y

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO. VIRGINIA 22134.510

3

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1610
MMER/PERB
(J ! 
ml

BU6 

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 MAJOR

USMCR

(a)
(b)

D Form 149 of 12 Jun 01
h l

Per 

1.
with three members present,

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
met on  8 August 2001 to consider

MC0  

petition contained in reference (a).

Removal of

the fitness report for the period 991001 to 991231 (AR) was
requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation

.

5

The petitioner contends that the report was completed by
3
‘
officers who where neither his Reporting Senior nor Reviewing
Officer during the stated period.
TR (transfer) report of 991001-000708 included the period of the
challenged report and identified that an AR (Reserve annual)
report had not been completed.
petitioner furnishes a copy of his Master Brief Sheet and the
report for the period 991001 to 000708 (TR).

To support his appeal, the

Additionally,

he states 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.

Simply stated,

the petitioner's claim has not been
His duty assignment and unit did not change

substantiated.
from the prior fitness report and the reporting period is
chronologically correct.
of record are identical to those officers on the immediately
preceding report.

Additionally,

the reporting officials

b.

What has occurred is that the subsequent transfer (TR)

report (enclosed with reference (a)) was submitted with
incorrect dates.
(AR) fitness reports for Majors in the Selected Marine Corps
Reserve (SMCR) and fails to comply with the provisions of
paragraph 3007 of reference (b) (i.e., "Extended reports are

It extends well beyond the date for annual

Subj:

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

USMCR

intended for use when an  
the submission of the last AN,
reporting occasion becomes due within 89 days or less.").

AR, or SA report and another

MRO's  performance has not changed since

C .

To ensure continuity in the petitioner's record and

eliminate the obvious overlap that currently exists, the Board
is directing that Item 3b ("from"
fitness report for the period 991001 to 000708 (TR) be changed
to "000101."

date) on the petitioner's

4.

The Board's opinion,

based on deliberation and secret ballot
ontested  fitness report should remain a part
fficial  military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

U.S.

Marine Corps

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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05598-01

    Original file (05598-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps Deputy Director Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADGUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD GUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 CMT 28 Aug 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION; CASE OF MAJO SMCR in the case of .Ol Aug...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03672-98

    Original file (03672-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He stated that since his fitness reports as a lieutenant and captain were sufficiently strong to allow him to have been promoted to major, and since his major reports are “far more competitive, ”the probability of promotion to lieutenant colonel “would be high.” Regarding his fitness report for 15 November 1985 to 28 February 1986, he stated that although it is an “annual” report, it covers only three months, during which the actual observation was only four to six calendar days. In their...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08309-01

    Original file (08309-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, tiled enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the reviewing officer’s certification from the fitness report for 3 May 1996 to 6 May 1997, a copy of which is at Tab A to enclosure (1). 1610 MMER/PERB ,6 NOV 23’1 From: To: Commandant of the Marine Corps Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C Per the reference, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05327-01

    Original file (05327-01.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 Review Board (PERB), dated 3 July 2001, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Career Management Team, dated 2 August 2001, copies of which are attached. Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...

  • 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 | 06690-01

    Original file (06690-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report for 1 August to 8 December 1991 be modified by removing all but the first sentence of the reporting senior’s comments in section C. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05822-01

    Original file (05822-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    d. Enclosure (4) is the advisory opinion from the HQMC Career Management Team (CMT) recommending denial of Petitioner ’s request to remove his failure of selection before the FY 2002 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. [Petitioner ’s] overall record is less than competitive when compared with his peers. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has Date of Report Reporting...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01098-07

    Original file (01098-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 203705100BJGDocket No:1098-071 March 2007This 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.You requested, in effect, that the fitness reports for 31 (sic) September 2001 to 10 March 2002 and 11 March to 30 June 2002 be modified, in accordance with the reviewing officer’s (RO’s) letter dated 11 August...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04958-01

    Original file (04958-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 1 October 1998 to 15 October 1999 (copy at Tab A to enclosure (l).) Petitioner further Review Board requested removal of his failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Active Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. Accordingly, your case will for Correction of Naval Records...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07142-01

    Original file (07142-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 6 September 2001, and the PERB chairperson electronic mail dated 3 October 2001, copies of which are attached. As each fitness report is for a specific period, your having received a more favorable report for the immediately preceding period, from the same reporting senior for your performance of the same job, did not convince them that the contested report was...