DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
SMC
Docket No: 07849-00
23 February 2001
SSG’Z
&JSMC
.I
Dear Staff Sergeant
-
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 23 February
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
2000, a copy of which is attached.
(PERB), dated 8 November
PERB. The Board found that plagiarism can be considered to be
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
“unprofessional conduct,
Noncommissioned Officer Academy (SNCOA). They found paragraph 3 of the disenrollment
letter dated 4 January
“When the deficiency is resolved, ” did not contradict your disenrollment from the
for plagiarism. 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.
200, stating you are encouraged to attend one of the other academies
SNCOA
” and therefore is a valid basis for disenrollment from the Staff
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.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
In this
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 NAVY
HEADQUARTERS
UNITED STATE8 MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO,
VlRGlNlA 22134.510
3
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD
ADVISOR
SERGEAN
USMC __
N THE CASE OF STAFF
(PERB)
(a)
(b)
SSgt.
MC0
Pl
DD Form 149 of 18 Aug 00
hl
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
met on 7 November 2000 to consider
petition contained in reference (a).
1.
with three members present,
Staff Sergeant
Removal of the fitness report for the period 991018 to 991124
(FD) was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
The petitioner contends the report is inaccurate, unjust, and
He argues that he did not cheat nor
2.
contains procedural errors.
plagiarize the work of another student while at the Staff
Noncommissioned Officers Academy (SNCO Academy), and that his
disenrollment was unwarranted.
alleges that comments in Section I were changed, that the report
was not processed in a timely manner, and he was not afforded an
opportunity to comment on the additional adverse matter
introduced by the Reviewing Officer.
To support his
petitioner furnishes his own detailed statement and documentation
pertaining to the reporting period.
the petitioner
Additionally,
appeail, the
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 officials at
the SNCO Academy were the ones charged with the responsibil-ity to
determine the existence of any improprieties.
It was their con-
clusion--as those having firsthand knowledge of the situation--
that the petitioner had copied the work of another student. In
this regard,
the Board notes that nothing was included in the
report concerning the work of a student from a prior class, but
that the petitioner's work matched that of one of his classmates.
The modification of this information from the prior edition of
the fitness report for this period would explain the revision
(i.e., to ensure accurate reporting).
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION
SERGEA
IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SMC
b.
While neither this Headquarters nor the PERB condone
the late submission of fitness reports, that single factor does
not serve to invalidate an otherwise administratively and
procedurally acceptable performance appraisal.
A revision to
the report to guarantee accurate recording of the facts explains
the delay.
--
the
C .
The Board observes that Sergeant Major
Reviewing Officer) did not, as the petitioner a
additional or new adverse matter.
resolved the issues surfaced by the petitioner,
of the Reporting Senior.
Sighting Officer) confirmed that established procedures were
followed.
arguments and assertions,
or inaccuracy.
injustice,
Finally, and not withstanding the petitioner's
Likewise, Colonel
Rather, he clarified and
the Board discerns absolutely no error,
albeit in favor
the Adverse
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Staff Sergeant
based on deliberation and secret ballot
official military record.
5.
The case is forwarded for final action.
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
BY direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
’
I
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05305-01
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 2 July 2001, and the memorandum for the record dated 2 August 2001, copies of which are attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04360-03
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. Sincerely, Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, “,RG,NlA 22 134-S I03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 9 2003 MAY 1 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 01156-00
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 8 February 2001, a copy of which is attached. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. The petitioner offers matters in extenuation and mitigation of his failures of the physical fitness test (PET).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11023-06
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERE), dated 13 December 2006, 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. VIRGINIA 22134-S 103IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB DEC 13 2006MEMORANDuM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03057-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed that the contested fitness report be amended by changing the beginning date from 27 February to 13 April 1996. They found the reviewing officer had no duty to direct the reporting senior to revise or remove those of his comments which rendered the report adverse, but he correctly ensured that you were afforded your rights regarding adverse fitness reports. This includes, but is certainly not limited to, Had there been...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06467-98
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 I Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY htdKIUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON, D.C....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08257-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 1 November 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 the existence of probable material error or injustice. MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06538-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 December 2000. 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 NAVY STATES MARINE HEADQUARTERS UNITED CORP S 3280 RUSSELL ROAD VlRGlNlA 22 QUANTICO, 134-5...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07271-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 January 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 (PERB) dated 23 October 2000 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached. ‘\ ‘: 1 i/-f{_ “,’ ‘I From : D...
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...