Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03867-07
Original file (03867-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



 BJG
 Docket No: 3867-07
 25 May 2007


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 24 May 2007. 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 24 April 2007, 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. The Board did not agree with your assertion that the comment, for section D.1 (“performance”) of the contested fitness report, to the effect you failed to accomplish tasks in a timely manner, should have been applied to section D.2 (“proficiehcy”). 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 àfficial naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

 Sincerely,


                                                      W. DEAN PFIEFFER
                                                      Executive Director




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

                                     IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                                                                    1610
                                                                                                    M MER/ PERB
                                                                                                   Apr 24 2007

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

(a) DD Form 149 of 28 Dec 06
 (b)      MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-9
(c)      MCO P6100.12 (MCPFTBCP Manual)
1.       Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 18 April 2007 to consider ~ contained in reference (a). Removal of the fitness report for the period 20051001 to 20060103 (FD) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
2.       The petitioner contends the report is unjust because he feels that the report was used as a counseling tool based on a single lapse in judgment. He further contends that his height was improperly recorded.
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.       Per paragraph 5001.la, “Do not report minor flaws or mistakes unless they are significant enough to affect the MRO’s initiative and leadership potential, or hinder mission accomplishment.” The Board found the petitioner fails to address the entire adverse nature of the report where his performance, “hindered the mission ... created unnecessary time constraints and failed to accomplish administrative tasks delegated to him.” Further, the petitioner does not address the events surrounding his loss of night optics due to his negligence. After thorough review, the Board concluded that the adverse nature of the report documents many aspects of the petitioner’s unsatisfactory behavior, not simply one incident.
b.       Per paragraph 4003.8f(3) of reference (b) and paragraph







Subj:    MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

3102 of reference (c), reports will not be rendered adverse if the MRO meets the prerequisites for the Physical Performance Evaluation (PPE). To meet the requirements of the PPE a Marine whose body fat percentage is above 18%, but less than 22% must have taken a first class PFT within 90 days prior to or 30 days after the taping. After reviewing the recorded heights in the petitioner’s fitness report inventory, the Board found that his height has fluctuated over the last 17 years. The Board also found that when the petitioner had the opportunity to correct his recorded height, he chose not to make a rebuttal statement.

 4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part o fficial military record.
5. The case is forwarded for final action.

C hairperson, Perform a nce
Evaluation Review Boa r d Personnel Management Division Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department
 By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03854-07

    Original file (03854-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 April 2007, 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06257-06

    Original file (06257-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 11 July 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01029-08

    Original file (01029-08.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 28 January 2008, a copy of which is attached. this adverse report for exceeding USMC height, weight, and body fat standards He requests removal of the report...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08833-06

    Original file (08833-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100BJG Docket No: 8833-06 2 November 2006This s 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 3 June to 13 September 1999 by deleting or altering the following comment in section K.4 (“Reviewing Officer Comments”) : “-Absolutely excels at times, other...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06678-06

    Original file (06678-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O370 -5100BJGDocket No: 6678-0617 November 2005This 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 removing the fitness reports for 1 June 2004 to 9 May 2005 and 9 May to 30 June 2005, as well as your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.It...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02

    Original file (04197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 06198-07

    Original file (06198-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. However, the Board felt the contested fitness report made it clear that your medical condition was the reason for your substandard performance. Finally, when given the opportunity to address the adversity contained in the report, the petitioner blamed his medical condition for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09462-07

    Original file (09462-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS3280 RUSSELL ROADQUANTICO, VA 221 34-51 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 5 OCT 2007MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDSSubj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01480-07

    Original file (01480-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:1480-079 March 2007This 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.It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) hasdirected removing the contested fitness report for3 October 2003 to 31 March 2004; and Headquarters Marine Corps(HQMC) has directed modifying the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02619-07

    Original file (02619-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Most importantly, the Board found that the reviewing officer failed to provide the petitioner an opportunity to submit a rebuttal to his comments. Finally, the Board found that the reviewing officer failed to have the report reviewed by a Third Officer Sighter for appropriate action. Because of the aforementioned discrepancies, the Board found that the report is procedurally incorrect and directed that section “K” be expunged in its entirety; this makes the report procedurally...