DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNE X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 6835-01
4 October 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 3 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 28 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
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
PERIL Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
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 OF THE NAV
Y
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QIJANTICO. VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
2
8 AU6
2001
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
CAPTAIN
USMC
(PERB)
..-
(a) Captain
(b)
MC0
P1610.7E
DD Form 149 of 14 May 01
w/Ch l-2
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three members present, met on 22 August 2001 to consider
Captain
of the fitness report for the period 001219 to 010326 (TR) was
requested.
directive governing submission of the report.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
petition contained in reference (a).
Removal
He challenges the report's
The petitioner contends the report is substantively and
2.
administratively inaccurate.
occasion, the period covered, the Reviewing Officer of record,
He also points out that when
and the listed duty assignment.
compared to the immediately preceding report by the same
Reporting Senior, there is a significant drop in performance.
With regard to this situation,
or informal counseling on diminishing performance.
his appeal,
a letter from Lieutenant Colonel
correct Reviewing Officer),
Assistant Chief of Staff,
command.
the petitioner denies any formal
To support
the petitioner furnishes his own detailed statement,
(allegedly the
from the
G-3 in the petitioner's current
and an endorsement
In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is
3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
written and filed.
The following is offered as relevant:
.
Not withstanding the information included with reference
Board finds nothing to document or substantiate that
(a),athe
the report is in error in any manner (i.e., occasion, inclusive
dates, duty assignment, or Reviewing Officer).
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 OF
CAPTAIN
SMC
was the Commanding Officer and the rightful Reviewing
of record.
b.
While Lieutenant Colonel
of the petitioner are a valid ma
prior to the one at issue, t
invalidate Lieutenant Colone
assessment.
as is HMLA-367, 52 days is a reasonable time to allow a new
Commanding Officer (Lieutenant
assess officers on his staff.
oes not negate or
responsibilities and-
ed helicopter squadron,
prior observations
cord on four reports
In a deployable,
to be able to
Co10
C .
The petitioner's
argument that the report is invalid
s also an Assistant
AM0 for the same
because Capt
period as the one covered by the fitness report under
consideration is not germane.
officer at the squadron or battalion level, and especially in a
deployable unit mode, will hav
that the petitioner and Captai
was not unusual.
Many times a primary staff
assistants.
re both
The fact
AM0 assistants
d.
Since each performance appraisal is for a finite period
changing circumstances and challenges may result
In this regard, the Board
and may very well differ from others by the same reporting
officials,
in dissimilar grades/rankings.
emphasizes that comparing prior and subsequent fitness reports
is not considered a valid gauge in determining accuracy or
fairness.
precisely how or why he may have rated more than what has been
recorded.
some type of performance counseling or feedback during the
period.
Simply stated, the petitioner has not documented
we find nothing to show he did not receive
Likewise,
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Captain
based on deliberation and secret ballot
official military record;
2
Sub-i:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISO
CAPTAI
IN THE CASE OF
USMC
5.
The case is forwarded for final action.
Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
.__
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
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 | 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 | 04272-01
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 (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. (BLT) executive officer (X0),...
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 | CY2001 | 08253-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 1 October 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. d. e. f. g - Including paraphrased statements from the JAG manual investigations is precluded by reference (b) The JAG manual investigation was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08032-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 11 January 2002, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner has not substantiated his allegations disclaiming performance counseling and undue influence on the Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION MASTER SERGEANT C part of Gunnery Sergeants insigh to gain first-hand briefing offic Senior (Captai (Lieutenant Co e-mail...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00955-00
The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that Report A should remain a part of Captain official military record. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps fitness report of 980117 to 980904. failures of selection. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Captain record and SMC Major he successfully petitioned the Duty fitness report of 940201 to 940731. requests removal of his failures of selection.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03763-00
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 26 May 2000, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS ~~~ORUSSELLROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07468-02
Regarding the remaining contested fitness report for 1 November 6 December 1996, Petitioner contends that this report is adverse, but was as it should have been, for the opportunity to make a rebuttal; that the comments and marks are inconsistent; that this report was submitted at the same time as the preceding report at issue, giving him no time to improve; and finally, that this report, in which he was ranked below all six of the other captains compared with him, was an attempt to help the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07787-01
On 25 February 2000, Petitioner, a sergeant, pay grade The Petitioner responded by saying "that the conversation was originally lieutenarnr colonel and if the captain was During the the Petitioner was told by one of the captains, in of E-S, was discussing an issue with a lieutenant colonel. The following Monday, Petitioner was directed by the Petitioner was advised of his Article 31 rights; executive officer to provide a statement, and he did. words, Pet for Captai request of a Petitioner...