DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 8308-01
20 December 2001
USMC
Dear Gunnery Serg
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 19 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 15 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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the report of the PERB. They were unable to find you had a personality conflict with the
reporting senior. In any case, they observed, a subordinate has an obligation to get along
with superiors. Your more favorable subsequent fitness reports did not convince them that
the contested report was unfair or inaccurate.
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
In view of the above, your application has
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
___.’_.___
_‘
-I
w’
._._.__
_..___.
________._______.
_-.
--.
.---
-----T-
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 221 34-51 03
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
15 wov
2001
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION
GUNNERY SERGEANT
USMC
(a)
(b)
GySgt
MC0 P
DD Form 149 of 11 Sep 01
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three membe
Gunnery Sergeant
Removal of
(a).
990930 (AN) was requested.
evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
et on 14 November 2001 to consider
petition contained in reference
report for the period 981001 to
Reference (b) is the performance
Fl (leadership),
F2 (developing subordinates), F3
The petitioner contends he was unjustly given marks of
F4 (ensuring well-being of subordinates),
Additionally, he points out that
2.
in Items
(setting the example),
and F5 (communication skills).
Section I fails to contain a "word picture" and that the absence
of counseling did not afford him an opportunity to be made aware
of the Reviewing Officer's comparative assessment and comments.
To support his appeal,
statement and refers to other fitness reports that contain
higher grades in the challenged areas.
the petitioner furnishes his own
"B"
In its proceedings,
3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
The following is offered as relevant:
written and filed.
the PERB concluded that the report is
a.
Not withstanding the petitioner's own statement, there
is absolutely nothing included with reference (a) to show that
the assigned grades in 'all of Section F are either unfair or
inaccurate.
petitioner's uncorroborated opinion regarding the level of his
performance as opposed to that of the reporting officials. In
the Board concludes the petitioner has failed to
this regard,
meet the burden of proof necessary to establish the existence of
an.error or an injustice.
This appears to be nothing more than the
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINI
GUNNERY
SERGEA
USMC
b.
Section I correctly does not contain a "word picture" of
That requirement did not become effective until
the petitioner.
the publication of change one to reference (b) in October 1999.
C .
The petitioner's inference that he should have been
counseled and made aware of the Reviewing Officer's action is
without merit.
mandate (unless new or additional adverse matter has been
added).
Simply stated, reference (b) contains no such
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote, is that the
of Gunnery
Sergean
based on deliberation and secret ballot
ss report should remain a part
fficial military record.
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 | CY2001 | 03795-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 May 2001, a copy of which is attached. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD 22 QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 134-5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 4 MAY 2001 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04233-03
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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 May 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board was unable to find the contested fitness report was “B” used as a counseling document.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00088-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure 1610 MMER/PERB 2 7 DEi ?OfJO 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 GUNNERY SERGEANT USMC (a) (b) GySg MC0 P1610.7E D...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06069-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. While you are correct that your record reflects no counseling entry about the incident cited in the contested fitness report, the Board was unable to were not counseled about the incident, noting that the third sighting...
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 | 02721-01
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. The Board found the incident cited, described by your service record page 11 counseling entry, the reporting senior and the third sighting officer as “minor,” was nevertheless important enough to warrant mention in the contested fitness report. Reference fitness report for the period 971101...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06691-01
The Board found the reviewing officer permissibly referred to matters outside the reporting period in question, in order to reply to issues you raised in your rebuttal to the contested fitness report. 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. As an adverse fitness report, the petitioner was afforded his rightful opportunity to acknowledge and respond...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04885-01
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 15 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner states he had no adverse counseling and naturally assumed his performance was acceptable.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07130-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed fitness report for 1 October 1998 to 19 April 1999 be amended by adding officer’s Addendum Page dated 26 June 2001. that the contested the third sighting A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05075-02
Petitioner's NJP. Based on the documentary evidence "that for good consideration and after Similarly, Petitioner was informed of his right to demand the NJP proceeding was conducted rec'eived all the rights to which he was Petitioner was advised of his right to counsel provided by Petitioner, properly and Petitioner entitled at NJP. Petitioner understanding his rights at NJP is the fact Petitioner also elected to have a s in fact p NJP, a had a right to submit written matters for...