DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
BJG
Docket No: 4220-02
23 May 2002
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 May 2002. 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.
the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated
18 April 2002, a copy of which is attached.
In addition, the Board considered the report of
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. They found the third sighting officer
report did not invalidate it.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
In view of the above, your application has been denied. The
’s nonconcurrence with the
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
JEPARTMENT OF THE NAV Y
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROA D
QUANTICO.
VIRGINIA 22134-510
3
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
SERGE
USMC
' DD Form 149 of 16 Feb
02
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three members present,
Sergeant
of the fitness report for the period 971231 to 980427 (CH) was
requested. 'Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
petition contained in reference (a).
met on 17 April 2002 to consider
Removal
6..
The petitioner believes the report represents an "injustice"
3
since his excess weight was a product of a medical situation.
To support his appeal,
excerpts from his medical record and directs the Board's
attention to the nonconcurrence by the Third Sighting Officer.
the petitioner furnishes copies of
In its proceedings,
3.
both administratively correct and procedurally complete as
The following is offered as relevant:
written and filed.
the PERB concluded that the report is
either in the report at issue
Nothing has been provided,
a.
.the documents included with reference (a), that shows the
or
petitioner's weight gain was acceptable or a direct result of
Rather, the seven
his back problems and subsequent surgery.
selected pages from the petitioner's medical record address the
injury and surgery,
the petitioner was not within Marine Corps height/weight
standards and the fitness report correctly reflected that fact.
In this regard,
injustice.
the Board discerns absolutely no error or
not diet and weight control.
Simply stated,
b.
As a matter of information, the Board observes the
following relative to the petitioner's weight:
Subj:
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
SERGEANT:
SMC
(1) On the ending date of his fitness report for the
period 970701 to 971231 (CH),
This was approximately three months after his back injury.
the petitioner weighed 192 pounds.
(2) On 28 January 1998 the petitioner's weight was
documented at 200 pounds (enclosure (3) to reference (a)).
(3) On the ending date of the fitness report under
consideration, the petitioner's weight was 210 pounds.
Surgery on 17 February 1998 notwithstanding, we find no
documented medical excuse for the
1 January and 27 April 1998.
18-pound weight gain between
The Board's opinion,
4 .
vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
of Sergeant
based on deliberation and secret ballot
official military record.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08696-02
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 September 2002, a copy of which is attached. and it is 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. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation The petitioner states the challenged report is "undeserved", 2. yet provides no statement...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08072-02
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. height, weight, and body fat as He was also not within established Marine Corps 73", 227 pounds, and The report at issue reflects the petitioner's weight standards for his 19%, Subi: J MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVIS SERGE E CASE OF STAFF USMC (PERB) respectively (over...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08366-02
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modification of your fitness report for 18 April to 1 September 1998 by removing the last two sentences from the reviewing officer ’s comments. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISOR SERGEAN HE CASE OF STAFF USMC despite the difficulties...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03129-99
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 7 May 1999, a copy of which is attached. Notwithstanding the petitioner's statement and the letter from the Reporting Senior, the Board is not convinced that the 1...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07535-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of the contested fitness reports for 1 January to 16 June 1996 and 2 August to 31 December 1996. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08819-06
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 29 September 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. Based on the aforementioned facts, the Board concluded the petitioner was over his weight limit and was assigned to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04457-00
Your allegations 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 23 June 2000, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02
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 | CY2006 | 01736-06
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 June 2007, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIO), dated 30 January 2007, copies of which are attached. The responsibility to implement this policy rests with the commander ~ not meet the prescribed weight standards, the commander~- must take specific actions prior to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04891-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 15 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 13 June 2001 to consider Staff Sergeant-s petition contained in reference (a). Lieutenant Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY SERGEANT THE CASE OF STAFF USMC 2 Reviewing Officer) went into great...