DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

USMC

BJG
Docket No: 7254-01
11 February 2002

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 17 April to 31 December 1999 by changing the beginning date to
18 June 1999, and adding “MRO [Marine reported on] attended and completed Joint Aviation
Supply Maintenance Management Course.  

”

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. 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 14 September 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.
effected by CMC has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.

In view of the above, your application for relief beyond that

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

3EPARTMENT  OF THE NAV Y

HEADOIJARTERS  UNITED STATES MARINE 
3280  RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 

22134-5103

CORPS

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1610
MMER/PERB
\ 4  SEP 

2001

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

Ref:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION  
SERGEA

& BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF

USMC

(a) 
(b) 

SSgt.
MC0 

P1610.7E 

DD Form 149 of 14 Jun 01

w/Ch 1

Per 

MC0 

1610.11C,  the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

1.
with three members present,
Staff Sergeant
Removal of the following fitness reports was requested:

petition contained in reference (a).

met on 12 September 2001 to consider

a.

b.

Report A

- 990417 to 991231 (AN)

Report B

- 000101 to 000229 (CH)

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

She also

her completion of a formal school,

The petitioner states she had two major changes of duties/

2.
responsibilities, and per reference (b), she should have
received three separate performance evaluations.
believes that Report A is incomplete since it fails to list
periods of nonavailability,
and a lack of opportunity to attend resident Professional
Military Education (PME).
beginning date of Report A is incorrect and offers her belief
that the markings in Sections D, E, F, and G do not reflect the
As an extension of Report A,
verbiage contained in Section I.
the petitioner also objects to Report B.
the petitioner furnishes copies of the challenged reports, Page
3 from her Service Record Book (SRB), and travel orders for the
Joint Aviation Supply and Maintenance Management Course.

Finally, the petitioner observes the

To support her appeal,

In its proceedings,

3.
exceptions, both reports are administratively correct and
procedurally complete as written and filed.
offered as relevant:

the PERB concluded that, with two minor

The following is

1

,

I

Subj:

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

USMC

a.

The petitioner is correct concerning the beginning date

(Item 3b) of Report A and failure of the Reporting Senior to
credit her with attending the Joint Aviation Supply and Mainte-
The Board has directed correction of
nance Management Course.
the report as indicated below and does not view either of these
items as invalidating factors:

(1) Item 3b 

- Change to read "19990618"

(2) Section I

- Addition of the following comment: "MRO

attended and completed the Joint Aviation Supply Maintenance
Management Course."

b.

The petitioner is incorrect that her periods of  

non-
availability should have been annotated and that she requested
but was not given the opportunity to attend resident PME.
her nonavailability did not encompass 30 or more consecutive
days, no entry was required.
require a mandatory comment that the Marine requested and was
not given an opportunity to attend resident PME.

Likewise, reference (b) does not

Since

C .

Contrary to the advocacy statement furnished by Master
USMC(RET)) that the petitioner had a
Sergean
Gunnery 
significant job change from June to August 1999, Page 3 of her
SRB reflects no such change in primary duty.

d.

The petitioner's implied contention that

not review her billet description early in the reporting period
We also find nothing contradictory
is not substantiated.
between any of the marks in Sections D, E, F, and G and the
comments in Section I.
comments supporting assigned marks are not required unless they
are ratings of A, F, or G.

the Board points out that

Specifically,

did

e.

No evidence has been furnished to refute the validity of

Absent such documentation, Report A, and its

Report A.
extension at Report B,
portrayal of the petitioner's performance during the stated
periods.

is viewed as a legitimate and objective

2

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY
SERGEANT

ATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF

USMC

The Board's opinion,

based on deliberation and secret ballot
4.
vote, is that the contested fitness reports should remain a part
official military record.
of Staff Sergeant
limited corrective action identified in subparagraphs  
3a(2) are considered sufficient.

3a(l) and

The

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

3