Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01759-08
Original file (01759-08.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



BJG
Docket No:       1759-08
27 March 2008




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 27 March
2008. 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 19 February 2008, 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 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, VA 221 34-5103        


                                                              
IN REPLY REFER TO:
                           1610
                                                                                          MMER/ PERB
                                                                        FEB 19 2O08


MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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


                  (a) DD Form 149 of 13 Aug 07
(b)      MCO P161O7E w/ch 1-9

1.       Per MCO 1610.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 13 December 2007 to consider
petition contained in reference (a) Removal of the fitness report covering the period 20040101 to 20041231 (AN) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.       The petitioner received an adverse report for exceeding Marine Corps body composition standards, and “being assigned to weight control”. The petitioner implies that the report is unjust because he was never assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP) in writing, nor was he counseled by his Officer in Charge of the assignment. He also argues that the reporting occasion is incorrect. In support of his appeal the petitioner submitted a copy of his DD2766 (Adult Preventive and Chronic Care Flowsheet), and the finding of his Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) findings.

3.       In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the appealed report is both administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.       The Board concluded that the petitioner provided no evidence, other than his personal statement, to substantiate his claim that he was never assigned to the BCP. In addition, he chose not to rebut the fitness report thereby accepting its accuracy.






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


b.       The petitioner also contends that he should have been given a “Special Fitrep”, rather than having this recorded on his annual report. 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 is correct in accordance with reference (b).

c.       Finally, the petitioner discusses that he was being treated for knee injuries and pending a PEB. These medical issues rendered him incapable of completing a full physical fitness test (PFT), and thus unable to “receive the first class PFT body fat waiver”, even though he claims he was at 19% body fat. He provides evidence to substantiate this, however, it is irrelevant. The petitioner did not meet the Marine Corps body composition standards, and thus an adverse fitness report was warranted in accordance with reference (b)

4.       The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report covering the period
20040101         to 20041231 (AN), should remain a part of official military
record.

5.       The case is forwarded for final action.



Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine 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 | 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 | CY2006 | 08819-06

    Original file (08819-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Based on the aforementioned facts, the Board concluded the petitioner was over his weight limit and was assigned to the...

  • 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 | CY2003 | 04360-03

    Original file (04360-03.pdf) 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. 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 | 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. ...

  • 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 | MD0601151

    Original file (MD0601151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You have four months from this date to reduce your weight to 214 lbs, or below and/or reduce your body fat to 18% or below; however you may also raise your PFT to a first class score while maintaining 22% or less body fat percentage within the time period to be removed from the program. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified: 20050615Basis for Discharge:WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURELeast Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Record Supports Narrative...

  • 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 20370-5100BJGDocket No: 3867-0725 May 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.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 May 2007. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with...

  • 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...