DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
BJG
Docket No: 8075-02
15 November 2002
SMC
Dear
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.
were, reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. Your allegations of error and
injustice
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 12 September 2002, 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.
(RO) comments ambiguous, nor did they find
” They found no
The Board did not find the reviewing officer
his comments violated the prohibition against damning with “faint praise.
RO’s comments and those of the reporting senior. They were unable to
conflict between the
find the RO perceived any deficiency or deterioration in your performance. They noted the
“comparative assessment” reflects how the RO compared you with your peers known to him.
The language in the fitness report order to the effect that the performance evaluation process
should not surprise the Marine concerned does not mean the Marine should know, ahead of
time, exactly what marks and comments an upcoming fitness report will include. Finally,
they found the
RO’s evaluation did, in fact, indicate you had done a good job.
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
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
Y
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22
ROAD
134-S 103
I
_&‘1’6” REFER TO:
MMER/PERB
SEP 1 2
2002
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION
LIEUTENANT COLONE
F
USMC
(a)
(b)
(c)
LtC
MC0
MC0 1610.12 (Marine Corps Counseling Program)
DD Form 149 of 17 May 02
P1610.7E
w/Ch 1-2
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three members present,
Lieutenant
Removal of the fitness report for the period 010601 to 010724
(CD) was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.
met on 5 September 2002 to consider
petition contained in reference (a).
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
Co10
He specifically identifies the
The petitioner further states the Reviewing
The petitioner contends the report fails to comply with
2.
references (b) and (c).
Reviewing Officer's assessment and comments as "adverse" and
believes he should have been given an opportunity to acknowledge
and respond.
Officer never admonished, counseled, or otherwise advised him
that his performance had declined to the point that his
placement in the comparative assessment would be lower than on
the prior report (also reviewed by Major Genera
To support his appeal,
statement and copies of the challenged and prior fitness
reports.
the petitioner furnishes
led
In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is
3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
The following is offered as relevant:
written and filed.
roffered in his review of the fitness report
At the outset, the Board emphasizes that what Major
a.
Genera
at issue contains absolutely nothing negative or adverse
concerning the petitioner's performance.
concurred with the Reporting Senior's extended evaluation does
not somehow invalidate how the petitioner was ranked in the
Comparative Assessment (Item K3) on the challenged fitness
The fact that he
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINI
LIEUTENANT COL
MC
report.
Reviewing Officer's perspective obviously changed.
In the two additional months covered by the
report,
the
b.
There is nothing in reference
(b) that requires either a
Reporting Senior or Reviewing Officer to provide a mirror-image
of a prior evaluation.
time and reflects a judgmental evaluation for that period alone.
Additionally, neither references (b) nor (c) require specific
counseling by the Reviewing Officer prior to that official
rendering their action on a fitness report.
Each report chronicles a snapshot in
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote. is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Lieutenant Colon
based on deliberation and secret ballot
:official military record.
5.
The case is forwarded for final action.
‘F
Marine Corps
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06619-02
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 | 07532-01
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 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV Y HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD OUANTICO, VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2001 2 +, SEP MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06067-03
In addition, you requested that the fitness report for 1 to 6 June 2001 be modified, by changing the beginning date from 1 June 2001 to 22 December 2000, and removing the reporting senior (RS)‘s section I comment: “This report was drafted and resubmitted to replace a previously submitted report lost in the administrative mailing process.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2003. In...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00836-02
Not withstanding the requirement to report the petitioner's unfortunate failing, of his overall performance and with a most positive "word picture" in Section I. nothing in this process was a quick the report appears to be a fair evaluation Contrary to the Both officers and failing to properly execute that bf enclosure (6) to reference (a), In paragraph seven I MEF clearly holds the petitioner responsible toward C . The petitioner is correct that paragraph 5005 of reference (a) requires the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10443-02
In correspondence attached as enclosure (4), the HQMC Career Management Team (CMT), the office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner her failures of selection for promotion, has commented to the effect that this request would warrant approval if the entire fitness report in question were to be removed. Chairperson, Performance Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00098-01
The Board did not consider this request, because this investigation report is not in his record. Petitioner also argued that the Finally, he asserted the reviewing h. Enclosure (2) is the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) in Petitioner ’s case, reflecting their decision to deny his request to remove the contested fitness report. The memorandum for the record at enclosure (7) reflects that both the contested adverse fitness report and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01250-99
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN COLONEL (2) Standard Addendum Page 1 of 9 (Frame Ell, 04 Fiche). attachments to fitness reports, other reference (b). 4. vote, remain a part of Colonel limited corrective actions through is that the contested fitness report, as modified, should 3a(7) are considered sufficient.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07545-01
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 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 | 05312-01
In addition, the Board , considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Review Board Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division of which are attached. VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) Ref: LIEUTENAN (a) (b) LtC MC0 D Form 149 of 21 Mar 01 h 1- 2 MC0 Per 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three memb Co10 Lieutenant Removal of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05327-01
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 Review Board (PERB), dated 3 July 2001, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Career Management Team, dated 2 August 2001, copies of which are attached. Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...