DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
ANNEX

NAVY 

2 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

S

BJG
Docket No: 5813-01
8 February 2002

Dear Staff Serg

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 7 February 2002. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this 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 20 July 2001 with enclosure, and a memorandum for the record dated
1 February 2002, copies of which are attached.
They also considered your rebuttal letter
dated 17 August 2001 with enclosures.

Documentary material considered by the Board

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 that whatever advice you were given concerning the
need for a source document to cancel your entitlement to basic allowance for housing (BAH)
did not excuse you from an obligation to fully and accurately inform your reporting senior or
current inspector-instructor first sergeant of the problem concerning your entitlement to
BAH. They did not agree with your contention that the contested fitness report should be
removed because you were not provided a complete copy of the investigation concerning
your receipt of overpayment of BAH.
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.

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

Enclosures

‘1uut
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

JUL 

! 

NAVAL RECORDS

1610
MMER/PERB
: 

Suhj:

Ref:

Encl:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY
SERGEANT

THE CASE OF STAFF
USMC

(a) 
(b) 

SSgt
MC0 

P1610.7E 

D Form 149 of 13 Apr 01

w/Ch 1

( 1 ) Excerpt from Command Investigation,

Ltr  5800 AI-I of 14 Sep 99)

1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,

Per 

MC0 

1.
with three members present,
Sergean
Staff 
Removal of the
(AN) was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.

met on 18 July 2001 to consider

zpetition  contained in reference (a).
port for the period 990713 to 991231

Reference (b) is the performance evaluation

The petitioner contends the Reporting Senior's justification

2.
for adverse ratings are not accurate statements.
and contrary to the Reporting Senior's comments, the petitioner
states he accepted personal responsibility to correct an
overpayment of entitlements and that he did, in fact, seek
assistance in resolving this issue prior to being confronted by
the Reporting Senior.
To support his appeal, the petitioner
furnishes several items pertaining to his separation, pending
divorce, and other matters relating to his personal affairs.

Additionally,

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

a.

The adversity of the challenged fitness report clearly

lies in the petitioner receiving almost three years of
unentitled Basic Allowance for Quarters (BAQ) at the rate for
The report was appropriately referred to the
married Marines.
petitioner for an opportunity to submit a statement of rebuttal
In the final analysis, however, the Reviewing
(which he did).
and Adverse Sighting Officers both concurred in the Reporting
Senior's overall evaluation.

Subj:

MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
AD'JISORY OFINIOIJ ON BCNR APPLICATION 
SERGEANT

II? THE CASE OF STAFF

USMC

b.

The petitioner's assessment as to the adversity not

All

being accurately reported is considered without merit.
officers concerned in the performance evaluation cycle reviewed
the documents submitted by the petitioner and his lawyer and had
the results of the command investigation.
information, this Board obtained a copy of the pertinent portion
of the command investigation (minus the 35 enclosures).
We must conclude, as did the reporting
enclosure (1).
ctticials,
For this, he was correctly held
falsified his marital status.
accountable, both monetarily and via the performance evaluation
system.

ncras9.on.s the 

As a matter of

tnat on many 

See

petiriorier 

Know~rlyiy

C .

Contrary to the petitioner's argument, the Board does

not view the report as being used in lieu of disciplinary
action.
petitioner's overall character and potential.
the absence of criminal intent does not excuse poor judgment.

Rather, it records factual information impacting on the

Simply stated,

4.
vote, is that th
of Staff 
Sergean

The Board's opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
itness report should remain a part
fficial  military record.

5.

The case is forwarded for final action.

rmance

Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

2

UNITED STATES 

MARINE CORPS

W(REpLYP5mTD:

5800
AI-1
14 

Sept99

Subj:

COMMAND 

INVESTIGAmON INTO THE 

EMENTS PAID TO

CIRCUM
STAF

w/CH 1.2 

(JAGMAN)

(LEGADMINMAN)

MC0 
MC0 
MC0 

(a) JAGINST 5800.76 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
(e) DODPM
(9 Manual 

P5800.16  
P1751.3E
PI080.40A

fbr 

Courts-Martial 

United States (I998 

Ed&n)

Qd 990907
dtd 990901

USMC 
SMC ret. 
MC dtd 990818

9 

PaIms Base Housing Office

940118
9908 19
90224

NGV)fC 10922 

( 12)
(13) Record of 
(14) Unit Diary Transmittal 

Depend-q
Emergency Data C
L-r
certification 0
Ce~cation 
o

Audit 
Audit 

ourt appointed Curator,

rtoS
rtOS

Iletter 

to Consular Office dtd 9505
dtd 95

ztter

;04
10920

dtd 990713

Excerpt of 
Excerpt of 
J%cerpt of 
PD 

Form 1561 

DoD Financial 
DOD 
FmadciaI 
DoD.Pinzuatii 

Depend&

90728
SUpport and Paternity
i
Manager&t 
220-22 
Manamt Regulation, pages 223-225
Managezneut Regulation, pages 251-253

Regulatibn,  pages 

Star to 

Substmtiate  Payment of Family 

Sepamtim 

~lwa,me(FSA)

WI
(24)
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
(291
(301

ENCL 

(1)

repared and presented by

940707 to 9908 15

LEStY
Statem

(33) 
(34) 
(3 5) Excerpt 

ofm(i 

~‘l~~%?%& Allowance for Quarters  manual, pages 

;MC dtd 990915

Preliminarv Statement

1. Per references  (a) through(f) and as directedby enclosure 

(l),
stances surrounding unauthorized entitlements  paid
July 1994 to 15 August 1999.

(l-3)-( I-5)

d

2. During the course of this invest
 
consulted on a regular basis.
Guid
source documentation, and possible interview requirements.

MFR SJA office, was

the 
strative and procedural functions,

3. Difficulties  experienced in the conduct of this investigation are outlined as follows:

a. Due to the long time period of the payment of the unauthorized entitlements, pertinent

the circumstances could not be identified and interviewed.

of  

Sta Des Moines, 

personnel who may have knowledge 
Additionally, most certification and application documentation ptio
into I-I 
certify authorization to make payment 
encompassed by this investigation, as they are used by 
andmaintained  only two years,

ofFSA entitlemen
lot

IA could not be located. Sp

b. 

Dueto the 

distancesbetweeninformationsources  

andtheinvestigating  

off&zer,all

delays and confusion waiting for documentation to 

coilectthroughphone  conversations,  fax, e-mail, and mail. Thisledto

informationwas  
considerable 
arrive and redirecting questions,
A copy of the official Annulment Decree was not able to be obtained within the time frames of
Bn., Legal.
this investigation. A request was made for assistance to obtain a copy through MSG 
be acquired, but there would be a cost
ecently been given a copy, at which

time the request for assistance

ire to provide 
Colonel in the 

fkther statements t
USMCR, who is

>m

conducted to answer many of the questions about actions taken prior to
to I-I Staff, Des Moines, IA.

,

~nsts 

ofFact

was stationed at the American Embassy,

That any Marine 

42.
subject to criminal prosecution. [Enclosure 

(26)]

wh- obtains BAH or other allowances through fraudulent means is

That a Marine is not considered 

43.
Allowance entitlements when the sole dependent is a spouse legally separated. 

“a member with dependents ” for Family Separation

lEnclosure  

(29)]

That Staff 

44
entitlements while legally separated 

Serg

id receive Family Separation Allowance

from his wife. [Enclosures (32) and 

(33)]

That a Marine must sign a 

45.
Separation Allowance in which they certify that they are not legally separated and their
dependent ’s address prior to being paid FSA, [Enclosures (29) and 

- Statement to Substantiate Payment of 

DD 1561 form 

(30)]

Family

46.
That Staff Ser
time that he was paid

ould have had to sign a DD 156 1 form each
>I

That from 7 July 1994 to 25 April 1997, while stationed at 29 Palms, CA, 

StafI?Sergeant

$4,153.80  in unauthorized BAQ entitlements.

ceived 
)3

That from 7 

3~1
4s .
confirmed that Staff Ser
and authorized him to c
paid to 

him in BAQ entitlements was unauthorized. 

ioned at 29 Palms, CA, it could not be
and had knowledge of his separation
out, the entire amount of 
$14,813.70

l?Znclosures (32) and 

(33)J

That from 9 December 1994 to 7 April 1995, while attached TAD  to 

l-95 
eived $445.00 in unauthorized

MGTF 

Emb

49.
USS 
FSA-T Type II entitlements.

Belleau Wood, Staff Serg

/

That 
50.
Staff Serge
entitlement

from 18 March 1996 to 23 July 1996, while attached TAD to SMAGTF CARAT-96,

ceived $5 12.50 in unauthorized FSA-T Type II

That 

.51.
April 1997 for 

Staff
l-E

That from 26 April 1

52.
for 
Type II entitlements.

TEMINS, Staff Ser

That 

53,
Staff Serg
Greece on 26 June 199

That 

from 26 April 1997 to 24 F
54.
Det, Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, St&S e
[Enclo
unauthorized BAQ entitlements. 

ported to MCSFTC, Chesapeake, VA on 26

e assigned to MCSFTC, Chesapeake, VA
eceived $122.50 

iti unauthorized FSA-T

or-ted to MCSF 

Det, Souda Bay, Crete,

MCSFTC and 
ceived 

%3,598.86 in

MCSF

That 

from 26 June 1
55.
St& Serge
Create, Greece, 
FS
entitlements: $292.08 in 
[Enclosures (32) and 
(33)]

56.
Moines, 

That 
Staffs
1L
tA on 23 

I~ 

while assigned 
&lCSF Det, Souda Bay,
,received the following unauthorized FSA
e I, and $530.00 in FSA-R Type II.

ported to Inspector-Instructor Staff, Des
IO)1

ly 

after checking in to T-I Staff, Des Moines,
@ that he was r
First Sergeant,

Administrative 

ChieS Gunnery Serge

res 

@),

(3), 

(4), 

and (3 

1>1

That Staff Serge

58.
unauthorized entitlements he was paid.

pnclosure  

(2)]

understand that he would have to repay all

That shortly 

aAer checking 

in to I-I
AI3
inorder to change
annulment of his marriage was complete. 

attempt to verbally drop 
pplication  

pnclosures 

(2), 

(4), and (3 

l)]

e believed that the

2

after checking
ortly
told by Gunnery Se
05cial source
t an 

(9,W ,

and 

(W

That a NAVMC 10922 Dependency Application, to drop a dependent or change a

61.
member ’s dependent status, can not be prepared without 
[Enclosure (3 

5)]

an official source document.

irected in March 1998, by First Sergeant
ct his dependency status. 

@xlosure 

(3)J

July 1998,
about receiving a 

SttiSer
c

nt. [Enclosure 

(22)J

stioned through his lawyer,

That on  

65.
annual audit even though he 

21, October 1998, Staff
lcne& the i

October 1998, Gunnery
his dependency status
had not legally changed, [Enclosures 

 
Sd

cetication portion of the 

(2), 

(4), and (3 1)]

Staff Ser
ted 
annual audit

That on 

21. October 1998, 

Staff Se
67.
dependent ’s location as 29 Palms, CA eve
[Enclosure (4). 

(15), and (3 X)]

son did not provide guidance to
cy location. [Enclosure 

(2)]

That 

Staff Ser
certi

70.
October 1994 to 
would have been reduced 
[Enclosures 

(27), 

(26), 

from the 
(33)J

(28), and 

required to sign his LES prepared on 8
d
annual audit or his BAQ entitlements

‘bith dependent” to the 

‘titho’ut?’ rate,

71.
That Staff 
November 1995 to 
would have been reduced 
pnclosures 

(27), 

(26), 

(28), and  

(33)]

Sergean
certi@ his current dependent status and annual audit or his BAQ entitlements

required to sign his LES prepared on 6

Tom the 

‘tith  dependent” to the 

“without” rate.

StafFSerg

72.  That 
November 1996 to 
certify 
would have been reduced 
[Enclosures 

(27), 

(26), 

his 
from 
(28), and 

(33)]

currat dependent status and annual audit or his BAQ entitlements

s required to sign his LES prepared on 8

the “with dependent” to the 

‘tithout”  rate.

73.
November 1997 to c
would have been reduced 
(Enclosures 

(27), 

(26), 

from the 

(28), and 

(33)J

required to sign his LES prepared 
and 
%ith dependent” to the 

annual audit or his BAQ entitlements
‘tithout”  rate.

on  

7

That if Staff Serge

74.
dependent status, his BAH at the 
“tithout” rate.

&closures (26) and 

(27)]

‘%th dependent” rate should have been changed to the

Id not properly 

certi@ his 

annual audit or

75.
after falsely 

That Staff Serge
c!rtifying his

76.
not properly 

That Staff Serg
cert@ his

That on 13 July 199
granting&

77.
the court order 
IEnclosure 
(23)]

causing him to
entitlements paid to 

fUrther investigate
St& Sergeant

ed BAQ at the 
(16), 

(15), 

‘tvith dependent” rate
(32), and 

(33)]

sures 

not entitled to 

BAQ/BAH because he did

s or explain her absence. 

pntilosure 

(27)]

ested an official copy of

ey General.

\

ived notification

scovery of unauthorized

closures 

(2), 

(4), and 

(5)]

9, Staff Serge

informed that he was
stice. [Enclosures (4) and 

suspec

(6)]

81.
That on 17 August 1999, Staff S
innocent and agreed to answer First Ser
First Sergeant’s statement. Enclosures

August 1999, 
a Lieutenant Colonel in the

StafF 

Sergea

at no cost.

pncl0.s

84. Th
known within  the command, that
StafT Ser
actions and conversations about his knew
l?Znclosures (6) and 

er I-I, Des

(34)]

.vas read his rights by
g certain articles of the

stated that he was
ch is summarized in the

t he intended to submit his
reed to assist him with this matter

itwas 
generaily
vorced and his

That 

IFist Ser
85.
was ever married or t
Enclosures (4) and  

(5)]

.

enc

not aware that 
g BAH at the 

StaffSerg

?vit.h 

depe

e&or-Instructor, Des Moines, IA., was not aware that
ever married or that he was collecting 

BAH at the

(4), 
l osu r es

 

(5), and 

(6)J

initial interview that he w
annulment proceedings with his wife.

[EncEsures (4) and 

(5)]

get

mtied to

this woman 

m

before he could a

conversation betw

That dependent allowances for 

91.
August 1999. Enclosure  

(14)]

living with another woman and planning to

osures 

(4), 

W, and 

(34)l

ad to obtain official source documentation

NAVMC 10922 Dependency Application

ation through a phone

St& Ser

were stopped on 17

cashiers check for 

% 100.0

ODinions

That from 7 July to the present, Staff Serg

1.
housing. 

FF 

(4), 

(5), and 

(8)J

That 

2.
Palms, CA 92277  
1994. 
(4)and(5)]

SC& Serge
after

w 

itted an application to drop 
ncy Application on 19 August 

A.E3IGm

19%.

id not live  in 

base

ive
ret

ad, 29
1Y

id in fact r
)I

considered legally separated when

That 

Stti Serge
identifj and correct p

5.
to 
[m 

(IT), 

(46), 

(62), 

(63), 

(65), 

(67), 

(69), 

(70)~ 

id not take appropriate and timely measures
tlement.
(72), 

(73), 

(77)]

and 

(71), 

That Staff Serge

6.
situation and stop unauthorized entitlements before changing his dependent status.
[FF 

ad sufficient opportunity to correct the

(73X(74),  

(67), 

(701, 

(691, 

(76)l

(70, 

(721, 

and 

ctions to be taken to reduce entitlements when certifying his annual audit on 21
IFF 

VW, (74) and  

(76)]

(66),  

not properly advise 

.St&

. 

8.
measure5 to correct
CFF 
(60), 

(57), 

(59), 

(62) 

and 

(66)l

ot take adequate

10.
WithC
the dis
L-FF 

(79), 

@4)., 

(8% 

(861, 

(87), 

and 

(=)I

h_is 

clarify 

maritial situation

ti not 
gave the impression of being single,
prevented

.

That 

Staff Sergeant
11.
entitlements and did not sav
(58)]
repay it. 

(FF (57) and 

w he was 
he knew that he would be obligated to

recel)tilg unauthorized

did not provide any financial support to
n as required by the referenced orders and

aims of providing in-kind finance 

support

ofhi

documentation 
Dependency Application so that he could get remarried in September, 1999  and add his new wife
to his Dependency Application.

(92), and 

(77), 
 

(88), 

(84), 

(89), 

(93)3

[FF 

(65)) 

(661, 

(67), 

(69), 

(TO), 

knowingly  certified annual audits 
‘Xvith dependent ”  rate entitlements.
(?I), 

(741, 

(7% 

(731, 

and 

(7511

from 

I994 to

15.
1999 that were false 
fFF 
(48), 

That Staff Serge
ino
(54), 

(47), 

(12), 

That
16.
unauthorized

17.
inorder to receive those en

owingly accepted 
(57)and 
owingly
4% 

WI
certif?ed 

(46), 

(49), 

$12,289.50  in

f&e FSA statements

(50), 

(=), and (55)1

18.
FSA entitlements.

[FF 

(49), 

(50), 

(52), and  

(55)]

owingly accepted 

%4,382.11 

inunauthorized

19.
his Record of 

That Staff Se
Emerg

owingly certified false information listed on
[FF (9) 

(lo)1

i-ind 

That 

Stti 

S&ge

20 .
Uniform Code of Military
official statements, and 132 
CFF 

(22-251,  

(27), 

(lo), 

- Frauds against the United States.
(75), 

(697 % 

(67), 

(65)s 

(46), 

(41-441, 

(7611

id violate the following Articles of the
ey order or regulation, 

- M aking false

IO7 

Recommendations

That action be initiated to 

collect ail unauthorized entitlements paid to 

St & 

Sergmt

2.

That an Article 32 Investigation be assigned.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 

(BCNR)

PERFORMANCE SECTION
2 NAVY ANNEX, SUITE 2432
WASHINGTON, DC 20370-5100

TELEPHONE: (703) 614-2293 OR DSN 224-2293
FACSIMILE: (703) 614-9857 OR DSN 224-9857

____________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~___~~~~~____~~~~~__~_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---------~
DATE: 1 FEB02

DOCKET NO: 5813-01

PETITIONER (PE

PARTY WHO CALLED: PET

SMC

WHAT I SAID: I ASKED WHAT ADDITIONAL EVI HE HAD WHICH HE
MENTIONED IN HIS REBUTTAL.

WHAT PARTY SAID: PET INFORMED ME THAT HE WOULD
UNTIL MAR02, AND THAT HE REALLY DIDN
HOWEVER, HE COULD GET MORE SUPPORTING STATEMENTS WHEN HE
RETURNED FROM HIS DEPLOYMENT.

 BE DEPLOYED
’T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL EVI,

3 
x

_a.*:& 
BRIAN J. GEORGE