DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
SMC
Docket No: 0816540
17 August 2001
Dear Staff Serg
This refers 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 removal of the fitness
reports for 28 April to 1 December 1995 and 19 September 1997 to 28 February 1998.
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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 16 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 Performance Evaluation Review
Board
(PERB), dated 7 June 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 warranting further correction. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred
with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. Concerning the contested report for
28 April to 1 December 1995, the Board noted you chose not to make a statement, in which
you could have noted any relevant extenuating circumstances. In view of the above, your
application for relief beyond that effected by CMC 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
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this
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
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.
In this
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
.
3280 RUSSELL ROA
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA
D
22 134-5
,
HEADQUARTERS
DEPARTMEiJT OF THE NAVY
UWTED STATES MARINE CORPS
103
IN
REPLY
REFER
TO:
1610
M
ER/PERB
Y JUN
&'
2001
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
BOARDD(PERB)
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEANT
USMC
(a)
(b)
(c)
SSg
MC0
MC0
P1610.7D
P1610.7D
Form 149 of 1
Dee 00
w/Ch l-4
.
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three members present, met on 6 June 2001 to consider Staff
Sergean
the following fitness reports was requested:
tition contained in reference (a).
Removal of
a.
b.
Report A
- 950428 to 951201 (CH)
- Reference (b) applies
Report B
- 970919 to 980228 (AN)
- Reference (c) applies
It is her belief that the
2.
The petitioner contends that extenuating circumstances
during the period covered by Report A caused her to exceed
Marine Corps height/weight standards.
Reporting Senior should have taken this traumatic event into
consideration when he completed the fitness report.
she states the Reviewing Officer obviously chose to adhere to
the letter of the law in dealing with her failure to maintain
established height/weight standards.
petitioner challenges the Reviewing Officer's comments and
believes the inference made is that she had been on weight
control continuously for a two-year period.
appeal, the petitioner furnishes her own statement and copies of
the challenged fitness reports.
To support her
Concerning
Re'port B, the
Likewise,
-~
3.
In its proceedings,
the PERB concluded that:
a.
Report A is both administratively correct and
procedurally complete as written and filed.
understands that the petitioner's focus during the period
covered by Report A may not have been on her Marine Corps
However, both the Reporting Senior and Reviewing
duties.
Officer were required, by regulations, to document her failure
The Board certainly
.
. ’
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEA
SMC
Both
/weight standards.
ere obviously aware of the
show that either officer did not take the
petitioner's situation into full consideration when they
prepared the report.
no error or injustice.
Lieuten
circu
To this end, the Board discerns absolutely
nd
d there
b.
The Board agrees with the petitioner concerning the
Reviewing Officer's comments included with Report B.
not, however, find that complete removal of the report is
warranted.
Reviewing Officer's remarks.
Instead, they have directed elimination of only the
They do
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote, is that Report A and the modified version of Report B
should remain a part of Staff
record.
subparagraph 3b is considered sufficient.
The limited corrective action identified in
based on deliberation and secret ballot
ficial military
Sergea
5.
The case is forwarded for final action.
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04360-03
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. Sincerely, Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, “,RG,NlA 22 134-S I03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 9 2003 MAY 1 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03138-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed amendment of the contested fitness report to reflect you were the subject of a meritorious mast. 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 (PERB), dated 18 April 2001, a copy of which is attached.
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 | CY2001 | 03130-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed amendment of the contested fitness report by changing the entry in item 17b (whether the Marine has been the subject of an adverse report from outside the reporting chain) from “Yes” to “No.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance...
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 | 04541-01
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 the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner states that on the day the report was written yet had never been placed 2. he was reported as being...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 04670-00
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 30 June 2000, a copy of which is attached. To support her appeal, the petitioner furnishes copies of her Request Mast Application of 26 November 1997, her...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03751-00
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04564-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. The Board found that your more favorable recruiter fitness report for 1 March to 30 November 1997, from a different reporting senior, did not invalidate the contested report. rt for the period 980101 to 980406 (CH) Reference (b) is the performance evaluation met on 31 May 2001 to consider Staff Removal The petitioner...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06881-99
They were unable to find how, if at all, his report influenced your nonjudicial punishment or your removal from the 1998 staff sergeant selection list, nor could they find how he changed his opinions following the review of his report by the CO. We reviewed Sergeant documents concerning his Administrative Remarks page 11 entries dated 980804 and 981125, Offenses and Punishment page 12 entry dated 990311 and CMC letter 1450/3 MMPR-2 dated 2. In view of the above, it is recommended...