DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
BJG
Docket No: 7987-03
17 October 2003
CAPT .
SMC
Dear Captai-
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 17 October 2003. 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 17 September 2003, 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. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
w i ~ s 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,
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
H E A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D S T A T E S M A R I N E C O R P S
3280 R U S S E L L R O A D
Q U A N T I C O . V I R G I N I A 2 2 1 3 4 - 5 1 03
I N R E P L Y R E F E R TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
s ~ p 1 7 2003
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
CAPTAIN p
USMC
.. .
-
l
Ref:
(a) Captai-
(b) MCO P1610.'7
DD Form 149 of 19 May 03
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 10 September 2003 to consider
captain-
petition contained in reference (a). Removal
of the fitness report for the period 980101 to 980429 (TD) was
requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner contends there are comments in Section C
that render the report 'adverse", yet she was not given an
opportunity to furnish a statement of rebuttal. She also infers
that since the majority of her regular duties concerned
equipment maintenance, the mark of "outstanding" in Item 13a
(Regular Duties) is inconsistent with the following statement in
Section C: "Required moderate supervision in maintaining her
platoons equipment." Finally, the petitioner believes the
markings in Section B fail to support the verbiage in Section C.
3. In its proceedings, the PERB concluded tha; the ~-epci~-L is
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a. Contrary to the petitioner's beliefs, the Board discerns
absolutely nothing "adverse" in Section C. That she opines
otherwise is viewed as a misinterpretation or misunderstanding
of the criteria established in Chapter 5 of reference (b)
regarding what constitutes adversity. By stating the petitioner
required "moderate" supervision is viewed as the Reporting
Senior's indication that she required no more than what would be
expected of a Marine of her grade and experience.
b. There ii nothing internally inconsistent with the
challenged fitness report. It is, in all respects, an
Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
CAPTAIN
USMC
evaluation of highly satisfactory performance during the four-
month period.
4. The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Captain
official military record.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08224-98
The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. 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. Subsequently, he unsuccessfully petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the fitness report for the period 970125-970731 and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02430-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. V I R G I N I A 22 1 3 4 - 9 1 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB MAR 1 8 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISOR SERGEAN HE CASE OF STAFF SMC Ref: (a) SSgt (b) MCO P1610.7E DD Form 149 of 30 Dec 02 1. 'CH"...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04628-02
advise-hat the report had been " . ~ a r i n e Reported On: a. L u t Name b. In marking the comparison, consider all Marines of this grade whose professional abilities are known to you personally.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 02618-98
The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that your contested adverse fitness report should not be removed. Regardless, the report under Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY LIEUTENAN SE OF FIRST USMC consideration is the official report of record and the one to which the petitioner responded. (7) ~ajor- advocacy letter of 23 November 1998 claims he was not aware that the petitioner 'was involved...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02766-03
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. Report B - 940419 to 950228 (AN). c. While the advocacy letters from Captain-and Sample all speak highly of the Master Sergeants -and petitioner's performance during the period covered by Report B, the Board concludes that none of those three individuals were in the petitioner's direct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 04431-99
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 July 1999, a copy of which is attached. They were unable to find that you were not counseled concerning your performance during the reporting period, noting that your RO states he is satisfied that your reporting senior (RS) did counsel you. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY h c A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07244-03
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. The Board was unable to find the contested fitness report was in reprisal for your request mast. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01228-03
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. If Capta his date of is the date of rank he would have received upon selection from the FY02 USMC Captain Selection Board. Captain Legge requests back-dating of his date of rank.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00146-02
in the report of the PERB in concluding no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. Removal of the following fitness reports was requested: a. Lieutenant Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) denied his request for removal of the Annual fitness reports of 960801 to 970731 and 970801 to 980731. ailed selection on the FY-02 USMC on Board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02227-99
The Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) reviewed the petition and denied the request. (3) This report also did not appear before the FY98 Board. e. Written comments by Reporting Seniors and Reviewing Officers.