Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08254-01
Original file (08254-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

BIG
Docket No: 8254-01
5 December 2001

Dear Chief W

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.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested
fitness report for 1 September 1999 to 30 April 2000 by adding the revised reviewing officer
comments dated 9 October 
deleting the nonconcurrence with the mark assigned in item H. 1 (evaluation of your
responsibility as a reporting official).

2001,’ and amending the original comments in section K.4 by

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 5 December 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 5 November 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 
comments contained in the report of the 
beyond that effected by CMC has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the
panel will be furnished upon request.

In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the

.

PERIL Accordingly, your application for relief

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

GUANTICO. VIRGINIA

 

22134-5103

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1610
MMER/PERB
5 

NOV 

2004

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)

ON IN THE CASE OF CW03
j USMC

Ref:

(a) CWO
(b) 

MC0 

P1610.7E 

DD Form 149 of   21 Jun 01

w/Ch l-2

Encl:

(1) Completed Fitness Report 990901 to 000430 (AN)

Per 

MC0 

1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

1.
with three members present,
two
the fitness report for the period 990901 to 000430 (AN) was
requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation

petition contained in reference (a).

met on 5 September 2001 to consider

Removal of

2.
The petitioner believes the Reviewing Officer, with whom he
had little contact, made a derogatory statement that he should

allowed to rebut.
: statement was the result of his (the petitioner's)

He alleges Lieutenant Colonel

write an adverse fitness report on one of his
To support his appeal,

the petitioner furnishes his
and a statement from the

Marines.
own statement, a copy of th
Reporting Senior of record

.

In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that, with one minor

3.
exception, the report is both administratively correct and
procedurally complete as written and filed.
offered as relevant:

The following is

a.

Not withstanding the statements made by the petitioner

and
Lieutenant Colone
other than his obj
the petitioner and the
viewed as unsanc
Lieutenant Colon

no substantive proof that
omments were based on anything
on of actual performance.

That

Reporting Senior believe otherwise is

tion.
ws the impetus for his comments.

Simply stated, only

b.

mments may not be
flattering, neither do they contain "adverse" matter which would

While Lieutenant Colonel

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)

IN THE CASE OF CW03
SMC

have mandated the petitioner's acknowledgement and opportunity
to respond.

C .

Per subparagraph 4014.2 of reference (b), a Reviewing

In this case,

Officer is required to include the specific reason for
nonconcurrence.
accomplished.
found that returning the report to Lieutenant Colone
would be a sufficient
and Lieutenant Colone

the Board believes that was not
Owing to the recent age of the report, the Board

That action has been c
additional commentary has been
e note that Lieutenant Colonel

n an Addendum
;ose to modify his orig
nonconcurrence to the mark in It

nd limit his
only.

The Board's opinion,

4.
vote. is that the contested fitness
should remain a part of
enclosure,
military record.

based on deliberation and secret ballot
report, as reflected in the

s official

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06688-01

    Original file (06688-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the reviewing officer’s second and third sentences from section K.4 of the fitness report for 20 May 1999 to 30 April 2000, a copy of which is in enclosure (1) at Tab A. As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04368-01

    Original file (04368-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    request for the By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at (3), this Headquarters provide encl ith Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY ,._iDQUARTERS UNITLD STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2 1 MAY 2001 From: To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C Per the reference, 1. has reviewed allegations of error and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07123-01

    Original file (07123-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner’s request to strike his failures of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this request has merit and warrants favorable action. (3), this Headquarters provided Lieutenant th a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06365-01

    Original file (06365-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 06270-02

    Original file (06270-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMC BJG Docket No: 6270-02 15 August 2002 Dear Co10 This is in reference to your provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has removed the following from the reviewing officer ’s comments in the contested section K of your fitness report for 1 July 2000...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06619-02

    Original file (06619-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that the contested section K (reviewing officer (RO) marks and comments) of the fitness report for 1 June 2000 to 31 May 2001 should stand. 1 8 20~ MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF LIEUTENANT COLONEL USMC Ref: (a) (b) LtCo MC0 's DD Form...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 07545-01

    Original file (07545-01.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 Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 September 2001, a copy of which is attached. applies Report A - 971122 to 980608 (CD) - Reference (c) Report B - 980609 to 980731 (DC) - Reference (d) Report C -...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04615-01

    Original file (04615-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested removal fitness report for 1 April to 8 June 1999. the of the It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report be modified by removing, from the reviewing officer’s comments and your statement of 30 June 1999, references to the CRC (Case Review Committee). Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and considered...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03462-01

    Original file (03462-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    icial military record, (l), PERB removed from Lieutenant the fitness report for We defer to BCNR on the issue of Lieutenant Colone 2. request for the removal of his failure of selection to the grade of Colonel. 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 the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Report Reporting Senior Period of Report 29 Aug 99 co1 980701 t0...