DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

BJG
Docket No: 838 l-00
6 September 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 6 September 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 (HQMC) Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB) in your case, dated 11 December 2000, and the advisory opinions
from HQMC, dated 17 and 24 January 2001, copies of which are attached. They also
considered your rebuttal letter dated 2 January 2001, and your two rebuttal letters dated
28 August 2001.

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 and the advisory opinions. They were unable to find that you
were not adequately apprised of the requirements for absentee reporting. Further, they found
nothing objectionable in your having received both a service record page 11 entry and an
adverse fitness report which, to some extent, documented the same deficiencies. Finally,
they did not find the page 11 entry and the fitness report to contradict each other. In view of
the above, your application 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

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

Enclosures

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

DEPARTMENT OF THE
3280  RUSSELL ROAD
  22 

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA

 

NAVY

134-5  103

OIC 
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

IN REPLY REFER TO:
161
0
MMER/PERB
2000
\ \ 

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON
SERGEANT

BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

USMC

(a) 
(b) 

Sergea
MC0 

P1610.7E

DD Form 149 of   2 

Ott 00

1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

MC0 

Per 

1.
with three members present,
Sergeant
of the f
requested.
governing submission of the report.

met on 6 December 2000 to consider

etition contained in reference (a).
t for the period 981001 to 990331 (AN) was

Removal

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive

The petitioner contends that since he received a Page 11

2.
entry in his Service Record Book for his failures to report to
class (which he believes is erroneous), the report represents
"extra punishment."
To support his appeal, the petitioner
furnishes his own statement, positive endorsements from his
and several other items which he
current chain of command,
believes will substantiate his position.

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:

a.

It would appear that there were two separate requirements

Based on the letter at enclosure   (3) to reference

One was briefed and posted for the
for absentee reporting.
students by the school staff at DLIFLC and one by the Marine
Detachment.
(a) from the Military Language Instructor (SFC Lyonais), the
petitioner met the intent for reporting absences as required by
the Policies and Procedures for Class Leaders.
was in meeting his obligation to the Commanding Officer of the
Marine Detachment (documented in the counseling entry at
enclosure (2) to reference (a) and by the challenged fitness
report).
Page 11 counseling entry or the fitness report at issue.
regard, the Board must presume that the petitioner passively
accepted the accuracy of both documents and had no extenuating or
mitigating circumstances to present.

The petitioner opted to forego statements to either the

Where he failed

In this

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVIS
SERGE

E CASE OF
USMC

b.

The petitioner has offered absolutely no documentary

that he missed only six hours of class

Finally, while paragraph nine of enclosure (5) to

evidence whatsoever to prove his allegations that his absences
were due to medical reasons or that the report itself contains
"false statements" (i.e.,
vice 60).
reference (a) indicates that Student Leaders will ensure that all
students in their respective class/section are thoroughly
familiar with the absence policy outlined in chapter four of that
directive,
excerpt from that chapter.
remained two separate requirements for reporting absences.

we note the petitioner has chosen to not provide the

there still evidently

Nevertheless,

C .

In his 11 July   2000 endorsement of reference (a),

Lieutenant Colone
of a "turf battle
nothing to corroborate such a claim.
that, by established policy of the Commanding Officer, Marine
Detachment,
failed.

contends the petitioner was the victim
than his opinion, however, there is
The petitioner. was aware

his absences were to be reported.

Simply stated, he

The Board's opinion,

4.
vote, is that the contested fitness  
of 

Sergea

based on deliberation and secret ballot
Dart

reoort should remain a  

L

official military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

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 ROAD

OUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1070
MIF
!.I 7 

3j.14 

'c%i

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

IN THE CASE OF SERGE
USMC

We reviewed  

Sergean
1.
documents concerning his
Remarks(1070) NAVMC  

118(11) page 11 entry dated 990310.

‘s application and supporting

request for removal of the Administrative

MC0 

P1070.12H,  Marine Corps Individual Records Administration
(IRAM), authorizes commanders to make Service Record Book

2.
Manual 
entries on page 11 for recording information that is not, or cannot
be, documented anywhere else in the Service Record Book or the
Marine's automated record.

One of the many leadership tools that a commander has at their

3.
disposal is counseling and rehabilitation for their Marines.
Corps policy is that reasonable efforts at rehabilitation should be
made prior to initiation of separation proceedings and that the
commander is authorized to document those efforts by a page 11
counseling entry per the  
paragraph 6105,
rehabilitation.

sets forth policy pertaining to counseling and

The Marine Corps Separation Manual,

IRAM.

Marine

The following comments concerning the page 11 entry dated 990310

4.
are provided:

a.

The counseling entry meets the elements of a proper page 11

counseling in that it lists specific deficiencies and
recommendations for corrective
found, and states that Sergeant
to make a rebuttal statement.
opportunity to annotate whether or not he chose to make such a
statement and if made, a c
service record.
Sergeant
by his signature and further chose
rebuttal.

e statement would be filed in his
nowledged the counseling entry
"not to" make a statement in

re assistance can be
s provided the opportunity

Additionally, he was afforded an

b.

Deficiencies listed in Sergeant

age 11 entry
address infractions that are punishable under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), however,
him on them instead.
duties and responsibilities as Class Leader for Teaching Team C-l,
while attending the Defense Language Institute, Presidio of
Monterey, California.

These deficiencies focused around his assigned

his Commander elected to counsel

Subj:

BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF SERGEANT

MC

C .

Sergean
violating the U
was never "read my
paragraph 3 above, Serge
instead of discipline him for

m:...that  he ‘was never charged with

ary Justice (UCMJ)  

's irrelevant.
mmander elected to counsel

." and that he
As stated in

these deficiencies.

d.

Due to 

Sergean
was assigned Class Lea
responsibilities included personnel accountability of all members of
his team.
required accountability of himself and it appears that his commander
held him to a standard of a higher level than his peers.

seniority in rank and service, he
ing Team C-l.

he was in a position that also

As a class leader,

One of his

e.

Sergean

The
statements and unsuppor
event, counseling by his commander, did happen, and it was properly
documented.
substantiating documentation to support his claim.

It is also noted that he does not provide

men is irrelevant.

laim that "these documents are false
claims against  

f.

claim that "The detachment procedures
anywhere 

Sergean
were not posted
supported by documented evidence.
a position,
of service,
current policies and procedures in order to perform those duties.
Paragraph 9 of enclosure (5) specifically addresses that he was
responsible for knowing what the absence policy was and "will ensure
that all students in their respective class/section are thoroughly
familiar" with that policy.

Class Leader supervising thirty students of all branches
a position that required him to be knowledgeable of

withi
Sergean

ent." is not
assigned to

g-

nowledges in paragraph 5 of his letter
001 policies and procedures on the first

Enclosure (5) outlines those procedures and also

Sergean
that he was app
day of class.
indicates that the school's
leaders
offer guidance.
performance input on student leaders to the appropriate Service
commander as requested."

and will conduct meetings as needed to address concerns and

"AD" was responsible for the student

"AD" provides "leadership

Additionally, the  

h.

Sergea

mmander determined that the

deficiencies contained in the page 11 entry were the result of an
extraordinary incident that had occurred and the circumstances
suggest a significant departure from the  
expected,level  of
professionalism and judgment.

2

Subj:

i. Se
deficienci
Sergean
to 
provisions

IN THE CASE OF SERGEANT
USMC

ommander determined that the
he page 11 entry were of permanent value

thereby documenting this event per the

In view of the above,

5.
request for removal of the Administrative Remarks(1070) NAVMC
118(11)  page 11 entry dated 990310 be disapproved.

it is recommended that  

Sergea

Acting
Head, Field Support Branch,
Manpower Management Information
Systems Division

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

3280  RUSSELL ROA

D

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA

  22134-510

Y

3

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1400/3
MMPR-2
24 Jan 01

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

OF SERGE

Ref:

(a) CMC ltr  

1450/5 MMPR-2 of 20  

Ott 99

uests removal of the Page 11 entry, the
Sergea
1.
or the period dated 981001 to 990331
adverse fi
(AN), and reinstatement of his selection to staff sergeant for
the 2000 Staff Sergeant Selection Board.

The Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) administratively
2.
me,from the 2000 Staff Sergeant
deleted Sergeant
selection list after his failure to maintain the high standards
of personal and professional performance expected of a staff
noncommissioned officer.

The reference applies.

-

Since 

Sergean

3.
eligible for the reinstatement of his selection to the grade of
staff sergeant.
reinstatement to staff serge

records have not changed, he is not

It is recommend

omotion Section

-Promotion Branch
By direction of
the Commandant of the Marine Corps