Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08819-06
Original file (08819-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
                                    BJG
Docket No: 8819-06
3 November 2006


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.
You requested modifying the fitness report for 2 December 2005 to 31 March 2006 by changing it from partially “not observed” to completely, so it will no longer be an adverse report.
The Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report by deleting the following from the third sighting officer’ s comments:
This calls into question whether [you have] the initiative and personal pride required of a SNCO [staff noncommissioned officer] of Marines. My initial impression based on this BCP [Body Composition Program] problem and lukewarm initial reports of [your] performance thus far is that [you do] not have what it takes to be a SNCO.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 2006. 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 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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. Accordingly, your application for relief beyond that effected by CMC 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






















DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO. VIRGINIA 22134-5103


                                    IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                                                          1610 MM ER /PERB
                                                                                           SEP 2 9 2 00 6
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS

 Subj:    MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
                  
         DD Form 149 of 3 May 06
 MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-9

1. Per MOO 1610.110, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 20 September 2006 to consider
 contained in reference (a) Modification of the fitness report for the period 20051205 to 20060331 (AN) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner contends that comments concerning his assignment to the Body Composition Program (BCP) should be expunged from the report because he was not assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP)
3. In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the report is administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a.. The petitioner states in his advocacy letter, “When I checked into 9 th Communication Battalion on 15 January 2006, I was 13 pounds over my maximum weight of 192 pounds.” The petitioner also states, “On 27 January 2006, I was informed I would be placed on the Body Composition Program.” The Board found that the reporting senior and the reviewing officer mentioned the fact that the petitioner was on the weight control program. Based on the aforementioned facts, the Board concluded the petitioner was over his weight limit and was assigned to the BCP.
b.       The Board found that the petitioner was afforded the opportunity to submit a rebuttal to the report and he chose not to provide a statement. The Board also found that the report was properly reviewed and third sighted by the battalion commander, who affirmed the accuracy of the reporting senior and reviewing officer’s statements.
 Subj:    MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERE) ADVI SO RY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

c.       The Board reviewed documents, 3270 and MOL, which the petitioner submitted to verify that he was never “officially” assigned to the BCP, and the Board found that they do not substantiate his contentions. The documents revealed that the petitioner was removed from his second assignment to BCP on the 14 th of February 2006, which is during the reporting period.
d.       The Board did find that the third officer sighter made inappropriate comments in h is review and directed that the last two sentences be removed.
4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part
 ~ military record, with the modification directed in paragraph 3 (d).
5. The case is forwarded for final action.

--


 Chairperson, Performance
         Ev aluation Review B oard
 P ers o nnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01736-06

    Original file (01736-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 10785-08

    Original file (10785-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [physical fitness test] is removing, from section I “Directed and Additional Comments”), “- the semi-annual PFT of concern as”; Section A, Item 5.a Fitness report rendered adverse as a function of assigament to Body Composition Program [BCP] [Marine Corps Or (MCO P6100.12) .” Item 7.b. Documentany 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05730-10

    Original file (05730-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1 January to 1 May 2006 and modifying the report for 28 April to 31 December 2006 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s *Directed and Additional Comments”), reference to your removal from the Body Composition Program (BCP). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500756

    Original file (MD0500756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Request a medical evaluation be conducted to determine the Applicant’s medical status for BCP and Remedial Physical Conditioning Program (RPCP) participation. [Your unsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program. Therefore, the narrative reason for separation, as stated on the DD214, is incorrect and should be changed from weight control failure to unsatisfactory performance.On 20021105 the Applicant was assigned to Marine Corps Body Composition...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600068

    Original file (MD0600068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant advised to loss 16 pounds or 5 percent body fat and maintain for 6-month BCP assignment period.021029: First Endorsement to CO’s ltr of 29 Oct 02. I am recommending that he receive a General under honorable conditions discharge.This recommendation is based upon the respondent’s failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards set forth by the Body Composition Program (BCP) . According to the reference, a Marine assigned to the BCP on two separate occasions (e.g., first and second...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR1054 15

    Original file (NR1054 15.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    JSR . Docket No: NR1O54-15 DN awed 1 ONTe dar ape tt tee tet ol 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. You requested completely removing the fitness report for 23 May to 31 December 2007.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101781

    Original file (MD1101781.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20060804 - 20060917Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060918Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years13 MonthsDate of Discharge:20101027Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)10 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:51MOS: 6046Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600170

    Original file (MD0600170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant failed to meet the Marine Corps’ body composition standards and will receive a 6105 counseling entry and be processed for administrative separation.050210: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Failure to meet the Marine Corps body composition standards while assigned to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program (BCP) for the second time. ), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, and advised being processed for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500509

    Original file (MD0500509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Concerning your assignment to the Marine Corps Body composition program. Applicant counseled that he will be processed for administrative separation due to failure to maintain the Marine Corps standards. The Commanding Office is recommending that the Applicant receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08027-10

    Original file (08027-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “SECT[ion] A, Item 5a- MRO [Marine reported on] was assigned to the BCP [Body Composition Program] during this reporting period for being outside of Marine Corps physical fitness and weight standards. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all...