Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09462-07
Original file (09462-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100



 BJG
 Docket No:9462-07
 8 November 2007

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 8 November 2007. 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 5 October 2007, 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 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 PFIFFER
Executive Director





 Enclosure




















DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
         QUANTICO, VA 221 34-51 03      


                                                               IN REPLY REFER TO:
          1610
                                                                                                   M M ER/PERB
                                                                                                    5 OCT 2007


MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPI NION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE C ASE OF

Re f :     (a) Form 149 of 3 May 07
 (b)      MCO P1610.7E
1.       Per MCO l610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 26 September 2007 to consider contained in reference (a) Removal of the fitness report for the period 19981001 to 19990108 (DC) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
2.       The petitioner contends the report is unjust because he was not allowed an opportunity to rebut the reviewing officer’s co mmen ts.
3.       In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a.       Per paragraph 5004.5 of reference (b), prior to 4 February 2004, reviewing officer’s were only required to refer the fitness report to the MRO if they added new adverse material. In this case, the Board found there was no new adversity added by the reviewing officer, therefore there was no requirement for the report to be referred to the petitioner for rebuttal. The reviewing officer simply addressed the disagreements made by the petitioner to the reporting senior’s evaluation. The Board also found that the petitioner did not dispute the facts that resulted in the adverse report and only expressed his disagreement with the reporting senior’s overall evaluation of his performance. Finally, the Board found that the petitioner does not offer any substantive evidence to demonstrate that the evaluation submitted by the reporting senior was anything other than his objective opinion of the petitioner’s overall performance during the reporting period.
b.       The Board concluded that the report is an accurate and honest assessment of the petitioner’s overall performance.
4.       The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
 vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
 o fficial military record.
5.       The case is forwarded for final action.


Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps


















Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01668-07

    Original file (01668-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Per paragraph 2010.5 of reference (b), when the reporting senior is relieved for cause, the reviewing officer is required to take over the evaluation responsibilities. In this case, the Board found that after relieving the reporting senior, the reviewing officer felt he had sufficient...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02602-07

    Original file (02602-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 petitioner contends the adversity of the report was based on hearsay statements of 15 students; he received no formal counseling from the reporting senior; he implies the report is improper, since it was returned by the third officer sighter for correction; and the report is unwarranted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10538-07

    Original file (10538-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 19 November 2007, 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. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS3280 RUSSELL ROADQUANTICO, VA 221 34-5103 N REPLY REFER TO:...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11033-07

    Original file (11033-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-B 100BJGDocket No:11033-0718 January 2008This 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 directed modifying the contested fitness report for 30 September 2006 to 13 March 2007 by deleting section K (reviewing officer’s mark and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01480-07

    Original file (01480-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:1480-079 March 2007This 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) hasdirected removing the contested fitness report for3 October 2003 to 31 March 2004; and Headquarters Marine Corps(HQMC) has directed modifying the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03627-07

    Original file (03627-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 2Q37O-51OOBJGDocket No:3627-0710 May 2007This 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 directed modifying the contested fitness report for 1 May to 6 July 2000 by removing section K (reviewing officer’s marks and comments)A three-member...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09502-07

    Original file (09502-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100BJGDocket No:9502-079 November 2007This 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 directed modifying the contested fitness report for 1 May to 15 November 1999 by removing section K (reviewing officer’s marks and comments)A...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05791-07

    Original file (05791-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 19 June 2007, 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. Regarding the fitness report covering the period 20050401 to 20050629 (TR), the Board found that the petitioner does not provide...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09135-07

    Original file (09135-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 (PERE), dated 21 September 2007, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 28 October 2007.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07244-03

    Original file (07244-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.