Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08913-07
Original file (08913-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
        


JSR
 Docket No. 08913-07
20 November 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 20 November 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 (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 19 September 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 PEP3. Specifically concerning the contested fitness report for 20 to 25 July 2005, the Board noted that not only was your court-martial sentence reduced, but also the charge concerning Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice was dropped. You may submit a revised statement, reflecting that you were not found guilty of violating Article 134 and that your reduction in grade was set aside, to HQMC (NSB), via the reviewing and third sighting officers, for file in your record with the report at issue. 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.                                                             W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                                                               Executive Director
































DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
                                             3280 RUSSELL ROAD
 QUANTICO, VA 221 34-5103       

IN REPLY REFER TO
1610    
                                                                                 MM ER/PERB
SEP 19 2007
MEMOR ANDUM FO R THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    MA RINE CORPS PERFO M ANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
         ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

         (a) - Form 149 of 9 Mar 07
 (b)      MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-9
1.       Pe r MCO 1610.1ic, the Performance Eva1uatioy Review Board,
 with three members present, met on 12 September 2007 to consider contained in reference
Remo va l of the fitness reports for the periods 20040828 to 20041231 (AN) and 20050720 to 20050725 (DC) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
2.       The petitioner contends the reports should be removed because they are inaccurate. He believes that the report covering the period 20040828 to 20041231 (AN) should be removed because the DUI charge detailed in the report was dismissed. He also believes that the report covering the period 20050720 to 20050725 (DC) should be removed because part of his sentence was set aside for his Summary Court-Martial conviction.
3.       In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the reports are administratively correct and Procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a.       Regarding the fitness report covering the period 20040828 to 20041231 (AN) and per paragraph 03.6c(2) (d) of reference (b), it is immaterial whether as a result. thereof, probation or some type of diversionary program is imposed and charges are later dismissed or expunged from civil courts’ records. In this case, the Board found that the petitioner does not provide any substantive evidence to show that the action taken by the civilian court was not the result of him satisfactorily completing the requirements of a diversionary program. He provides a dismissal order approximately two years after he pled no contest to the DUI charge.




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

b.       Concerning the fitness report covering the period 20050720 to 20050725 (DC) and per paragraph 3004.2 of reference (b), commands are directed to submit “DC” reports when a Marine is convicted of any offense by a summary court-martial In this case, the Board found that the petitioner only provides evidence to show that his sentence was modified as his reduction in grade was set aside. The original conviction still stands and remains on the petitioner’s permanent record.
4.       The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot . is the member contested fitness reports should remain a part official military record.

5.       The case is forwarded for final ac ion.


Colonel , U.S. Marine Corps
Chairp e rson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personn el Management Division
Manpowe r and Reserve Affairs
Departm e nt
By dire c tion of the Commandant
of the Mari ne Corps

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11161-06

    Original file (11161-06.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. After thorough review, the Board found that in regard to the fitness reports covering the periods 20040202 to 20041231 (AN) and 20050101 to 20050430 (CD), the reporting senior properly rendered both reports adverse. In regard to the fitness reports covering the periods 20050731 to 20051228...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03136-99

    Original file (03136-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    (HQMC) d. Enclosure (2) is the report of the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) in Petitioner ’s case.The report reflects the PERB decision that Petitioner for removal of his fitness report should be denied This report reads in pertinent part as follows: ’s request . to not report the DUI conviction. ” (b), the applicable Marine Corps Order governing .civilian conviction will be reported in the CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07838-10

    Original file (07838-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    JAMS stated that the NUP “stemmed from [Petitioner’s] failure to report a civilian DUI arrest,” however, the UPB entry actually says he was punished “for failing to notify his command of his DUI conviction [emphasis added] .” JAM5 noted that “the requirement to report the conviction (rather than the arrest) is lawful.” d. Enclosure (4) explains that PERB directed removing the contested fitness report in light of enclosure (3). e. In enclosure (5), the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01759-08

    Original file (01759-08.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. Per paragraph 500L3d of reference (b), “the RS is required to render the report adverse when the MRO is or was assigned to the BCP ... at any time during the reporting period.” There is no requirement for a Directed by the Commandant (DC) report, or a “special report”. The reporting occasion...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10202-06

    Original file (10202-06.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. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished uponrequestAlthough the Board voted not to remove the contested fitness report, you may submit the Cumberland County court order of dismissal to future selection boards.It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08332-98

    Original file (08332-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They also considered the evidence considered at your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) proceedings, and your counsel’s undated rebuttal letter. The punishment imposed upon Petitioner and Petitioner does not deny the In reviewing Petitioner's case, however, Accordingly, we recommend that Petitioner's request for 7 . The uncontroverted matter of fact relative to removal of the fitness report Unless and until The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a...

  • 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 | CY2006 | 10210-06

    Original file (10210-06.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 (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 8 November 2006, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (Mb), dated 21...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04072-00

    Original file (04072-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You again request that this fitness report be removed, and you add a new request for consideration by a special selection board for promotion to lieutenant colonel. petitioner alleges that senior officers, career counselors, and at least one monitor, him of fair consideration for command, promotion, and school selection. record and FYOl 0 and Subsequently, he Senior fitness requests removal of In our opinion, removing the petitioned report would have 3. significantly increased the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03999-10

    Original file (03999-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 8 December 2007 to 8 August 2008, a copy of which is at Tab A. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing all remaining references to his NJP of 7 August 2008, to include the following: {1) Unit Punishment Book entry (2) Second sentence,...