Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07650-00
Original file (07650-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE. NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SMC
Docket No: 0765040
7 June 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 7 June 2001. Your allegations of error and injustice
were reviewed in accordance with administrative 
regul,ations 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
6 November 2000, 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
applicallon has been denied. The names and
in the report of the PERB. 
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Accordi:ngly, your 

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.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official

In this

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 NAVY

HEADQUARTEIRS  UNITED STATES

:3280 RUSSELL ROA

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA

  22 

 

MA!PlNE  CORP S
D

134-!i 103

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB

6 

IIOV 

?flflo

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISO
SERGEA

HE CASE OF STAFF
SMC

(a) 
(b) 

SSgt
MC0 

P1610.7D

DD Form 149 

of 17 Aug 00

Per 

MC0 

1.
with three members present,
Staff Sergeant
Removal of the

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
met on 2 November 2000 to consider

petition contained in reference (a).

following fitness reports was requested:

a.

b.

Report A 

- 9.50505 to 950811 (TD)

Report B

- 951110 to 960205 (TD)

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing
submission of both  

rep0rt.s.

'could be misinterpreted, indicating that

The petitioner contends there is a statement in the narrative

2.
portion of Report A that
the "administrative oversight"
the petitioner argues that
was his fault.
despite the noted improvement in his performance, as reflected in
several Section B grades and Section C comments, Item 15a
reflects a lower rating than on the previous report by the same
Reporting Senior.
inconsistency has unfairly affected his competitiveness.

It is the petitioner's belief that this

regarding weapons qualification

Concerning Report B,

In its proceedings,

3.
the PERB concluded that both reports are
administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and
filed.

The following is offered as  

re,levant:

a.

At the outset,

emphE.sizes  that the petitioner
has offered no evidence whatsoever to support his allegation that
either report is,either unfair or unjust.

the Board 

b.

Report A had the potential to be "adverse" due to the

marking in Item 5a (qualification  
However, based on the Reporting Senior's explanation, no
adversity was intended or inferred.

"X"; required did not fire).

In fact, and contrary to the

Subj:

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

USMC

petitioner's argument,
to be the petitioner's fault.

the Board did not construe the "oversight"

C .

i.e., Report A),

-:he prior report by First

tha.: the overall tone of

While the Board recognizes  
Report B reflects an improvement over
Lieutenant
petitioner's lower placement in Item  
appraisal.
not an average of other Section B  
evaluation of the "whole Marine"
Corps contemporaries whose abilities have been known to the
Reporting Senior (subparagraph 4006.1 of reference (b) applies).

mark.ings,  but a separate

the:j do not find the

l!Sa to invalidate the

In this regard,

the Board points out that Item 15 is

in relation to all other Marine

The Board's opinion,

4.
based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness reports should remain a part
of Staff Sergeant

fficial  military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

Performance

Evalua.tion 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02395-01

    Original file (02395-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. (b) is the performance evaluation met on 21 March 2001 to consider Reference Board, Removal 2.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04367-00

    Original file (04367-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. JUIi MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINI GUNNERY SERGE E OF USMC (a) (b) (c) GySg MC0 MC0 P1610.7C Form 149 of 10 Apr 00 l-4 w/Ch 1-5 Per MC0 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01351-00

    Original file (01351-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2 Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FIRST LIEUTENAN USMC 5. petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board removal of the To Temporary Duty fitness report of 980701 to First Lieutenant 990112. his failures of selection. The record reflects less competitive Section B marks in Regular Duties, Administrative Duties, Handling Officers, Training Personnel, Military Presence, Attention to Duty, Initiative,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02

    Original file (04197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Report A - 990827 to 991231 (AN). Report C - 000630 to 001231 (AN). Evaluation Review Board, request for May 2002 to consider Staff removal of his fitness report for the period 010101 to 010209 Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive (CH).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05312-01

    Original file (05312-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board , considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Review Board Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division of which are attached. VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) Ref: LIEUTENAN (a) (b) LtC MC0 D Form 149 of 21 Mar 01 h 1- 2 MC0 Per 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three memb Co10 Lieutenant Removal of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08305-00

    Original file (08305-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR SMC adverse report at the time the report is prepared. 1610 MMER/PERB 6 ; OEC MU MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) TION IN THE CASE OF USMC (a) (b) DD Form 149 of 7 Sep 00 Ch l-6 Per 1. with three members present, MC0 161O.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06813-02

    Original file (06813-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY SERGEANT E CASE OF STAFF MC 5. MC0 P5354.1C, Marine MC0 1610.12, the U.S. 3 . The counseling entry meets the elements of a proper page 11 counseling in that it lists deficiencies, recommendations for corrective action, and states that Staff opportunity to make a rebutta Additionally, the entry affords him an opportunity to annotate whether or not he desires to make such a statement and if made, a copy of the statement...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04866-01

    Original file (04866-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03751-00

    Original file (03751-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the memorandum for the record be filed in your official record stating name, grade and title of the third sighting officer. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280RUSSELLROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 TO: IN REPLY REFER 1610 MMER/PERB 2 4 MAY 2008 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Sub-i: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...