Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03140-01
Original file (03140-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

SMC
Docket No: 03 140-01
10 August 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 
session, considered your application on 9 August 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 Performance Evaluation Review
Board 

(PERB), dated 18 April 2001, a copy of which is attached.

ex_ecutive

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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

‘)
HEADQUARTERS 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

UNIT ED  ST AT ES 
3280  RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA   22 134-5  

MARINE  
103

CORPS

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
1 

8 APR  

‘2OtJ1

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

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

BCNR APPLICATION

IN THE CASE OF

, USMC

Ref:

(a) 
(b) 

Sergean
P16
MC0 

DD Form 149 of 18 Jan 01
1

Per 

MC0 

1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

1.
with three members present,
Sergeanetition  contained in reference (a).
of the fitness report for the period 991213 to 000113 (FD) was
requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation

met on 2 April 2001 to consider

Removal

The petitioner contends she failed the physical fitness test

2.
(PFT) because she had not been instructed on the proper way to
do crunches.
the petitioner furnishes
her own statement.

To support her appeal,

In its proceedings,

3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
written and filed.
The following is offered as relevant:

the PERB concluded that the report is

a.

At the outset,

the Board emphasizes that the petitioner
has done nothing more than provide a second rebuttal to an issue
that has already been officially resolved.
the Reviewing Officer specifically stated that prior to taking
the PFT, all DI School students,
provided a demonstration of how to properly execute the crunch.

including the petitioner, were

In his adjudication,

b.

To justify the deletion of a fitness report, evidence of
Such is simply not the

error or injustice should be produced.
situation in this case.

The Board's opinion,

4.
vote, is th
of Sergeant

,based on deliberation and secret ballot
ted fitness report should remain a part
icial military record.

Subj:

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

’ USMC

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08768-01

    Original file (08768-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2002. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 1 December 2001, a copy of which is attached. VIRGINIA 221 34-51 0 Y 3 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2 x m r DEC I MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04709-01

    Original file (04709-01.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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 8 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02

    Original file (04197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Report A - 990827 to 991231 (AN). Report C - 000630 to 001231 (AN). Evaluation Review Board, request for May 2002 to consider Staff removal of his fitness report for the period 010101 to 010209 Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive (CH).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02395-01

    Original file (02395-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2001. 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. (b) is the performance evaluation met on 21 March 2001 to consider Reference Board, Removal 2.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08255-01

    Original file (08255-01.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. They were likewise unable to find that you were not given a chance to submit an “MRO [Marine reported on] worksheet” or that you were not given a chance to discuss your billet description with the reporting senior. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation 000425 to 000717 The petitioner...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01491-01

    Original file (01491-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2001. !‘I FIB MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: ( ‘ Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR AP SERGE N THE CASE OF USMCR (a) (b) Sergea MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 13 w/Ch l-5 Ott 00 Per MC0 met on 21 February 2001 to consider 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05819-01

    Original file (05819-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 July 2001, a copy of which is attached. Simply stated, this is a matter of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07986-01

    Original file (07986-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 October 2001, a copy of which is attached. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation met on 10 October Sergean The petitioner contends the comments made by both th 2 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07832-02

    Original file (07832-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 2002. alle$ations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 30 August 2002, a copy of which is attached Documentary material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04558-01

    Original file (04558-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. 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. MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 23 Jan 01 w/Ch 1-4 Per MC0 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three members Sergean of the fitness report for the period 970101 to 971231 (AN) was requested.