DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
BJG
Docket No: 8072-02
15 November 2002
SMC
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 15 November 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. In addition, the Board
considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review
Board
2002, a copy of which is attached.
(PERB), dated 13 September
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
body fat as within standards, this would not establish that you were, in fact, within standards.
In this regard, you offered nothing to establish that the medical personnel who measured you
did so properly. 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.
PERIL While it may be correct that medical personnel measured your
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
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
Y
3280 RUSSELL ROA
D
QUANTICO. VIRGINIA
22
134-6
103
IN
REPLY
REFER
TO:
161 0
MMER/PERB
2ofl2
SEP 1 3
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
(PERB)
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF STAFF
SERGEA
MC
DD Form 149 of 9 Apr
02
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
SS
MC0
P1610.7E
MC0
6100.10B
MC0 6100.33
Per
MC0
1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
1.
with three members
etition contained in reference (a).
Staff
Removal of the fitness report for the period 981201 to 990607
(CH) was requested.
directive governing submission of the report.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
met on 11 September 2002 to consider
Sergean
The petitioner contends his body fat percentage was not
2.
assessed per the procedures outlined in
he did not receive a proper screening by the Battalion Aide
Station.
statemen
Captai
letter from the Reporting Senior of record,
To support his appeal,
the petitioner provides his own
reference (c) and that
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.
As stipulated in reference (d), company commanders will
establish weight control procedures and administer the program
The Order does not require
that complies with that directive.
medical personnel to either monitor or conduct command weigh-ins
or body fat "taping"
as this is a commander's function.
b.
The petitioner was found to be 229 pounds the day of the
weigh-in and 20 pounds over the maximum
height (73").
height/weight standards since he was over the allowable body fat
percentage (21%).
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 Marine Corps standards).
petitioner is not contesting the accuracy of the recorded
information,
but merely the method by which it was obtained.
We note the
C .
states:
Subparagraph
4003.8f(3) of that directive, quoted
"If the body fat percentage reported is 19
MROs, the report is adverse unless
The Reporting Senior's evaluation of the petitioner
appears to be accurate and in full compliance with reference
(b).
verbatim,
percent or higher for male
Section I reflects than an appropriately credentialed health
care provider diagnosed the individual's condition to be the
result of an underlying or associated disease process."
case, the Reporting Senior clearly stated the petitioner was
Advocacy corre-
placed on weight control on 14 April 1999.
ot withstanding, there is no
spondence from Captai
on the Weight Control Program
proof the petitioner's
In fact, the
reference (c).
was improper or in vi
specifi-
Adverse Sighting Officer (Lieutenant Colon
cally mentioned the weight issue and indicated there had been
"strict compliance" with reference (d).
In the
The Board's opinion,
4.
vote, is that
of Staff Serge
based on deliberation and secret ballot
fitness report should remain a part
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04541-01
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 4 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner states that on the day the report was written yet had never been placed 2. he was reported as being...
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 | 09131-02
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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 16 October 2002, a copy of which is attached. The failure of the petitioner's unit to ensure that his assignment to weight control was reflected in MCTFS does...
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 | CY2001 | 07267-01
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. The following is offered as relevant: a. Evidently both the petitioner and the Reporting Seniors the Marine reported on needs to be seen by a for both reports have misunderstood the criteria contained in references (b) and (c) concerning weight issues. To be placed on Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03738-02
petitioner's assignment to the Military Appearance Program was correctly included on the fitness reports. As with Report A, the adversity of Report B was that he was assigned to the Military Appearance Program. rmance Evaluation Review Board Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROA D QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-510 3 MEMORANDUM FOR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08897-02
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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 October 2002, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3250 RUSSELL...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06066-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Review Board (PERB), dated 16 July 2003, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Officer Counseling and Evaluation Section, Personnel Management Division dated 28 May 2003, copies of which are attached. viewed Major ailed 'record and and FY04 USMC equests selec In our opinion, removal of the petitioned report would 3. slightly enhance the strength of the record, but not enough to warrant removal of the failures of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 04670-00
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 30 June 2000, a copy of which is attached. To support her appeal, the petitioner furnishes copies of her Request Mast Application of 26 November 1997, her...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08376-02
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 23 September 2002 with attachment, a copy of which is attached. They also noted that the Marine Corps Total Force System entry in the report of the 2001; attached to the the contested fitness report for 1 March 2001 to 18 February 2002 stated you were removed on 20 December 2001. PERB report showed you were assigned to weight control on 17 January It is regretted...