Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02207-08
Original file (02207-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 2207-08
26 June 2008

 

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 26 June 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 3 March 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,

\wQeeS C
W. DEAN PPRIREE

Executive Direatod

Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 iN REPLY REFER TO:

 

1610
MMER/PERB

MAR 05 2098

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
cere oe iii ta i i oo Heit a Gis re renee yee

my

    
  
    

    

   
 

     
    
 

 
 

 

Pare DD Form 149 of 1 Nov 07

Ref : ake Ee OTs me
(b) MCO P1610.7E w/ch 1-5

 

1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 23 January 2008 to consider

    

wei Wictition contained in reference (a). Removal of
fitness report for the period 20021207 to 20030119 (DC) was
requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive

governing submission of the report.

2. The petitioner requests the removal of an adverse fitness
report that’ he received for being subject to nonjudicial
punishment (NJP). He has not provided any supporting documents.

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 petitioner argues that there is no record anywhere in
his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or his service record
book (SRB) that documents the NUP, and therefore this fitness
report should be removed. The command’s failure to properly
document and report the NJP is in error, however, it has no
bearing on this fitness report. The Board found that the lack of
documentation elsewhere in the petitioner’s record, does not
establish a basis for removing the fitness report which does

properly document the NUP.

b. The Board also found that in his rebuttal, the petitioner
accepted full responsibility for his actions that led to the NUP.

By his own admission, he was clearly guilty of the offense, thus
rendering the report accurate.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03475-08

    Original file (03475-08.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. The petitioner submitted evidence that defended che actions for which he was charged at NUP. Although the petitioner offers extenuating circumstances for his guilty plea, the fact remains that he did indeed accept NJP, and plead and was found guilty.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04391-08

    Original file (04391-08.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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 30 April 2008, a copy of which is attached. The Board found that since the Page i1 entry is not a part of her record, it cannot be considered when adjudicating this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01771-08

    Original file (01771-08.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. The Board found that the petitioner offered nothing new in this appeal that had not already been properly adjudicated in the fitness report. Further, he offered no substantial proof that the adjudications were incorrect.Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09114-08

    Original file (09114-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 7 May 2008, Applicant submitted a request to the Board of Corrections of Naval Records (BCNR) to have his fitness report removed on the grounds that he was not afforded the opportunity to present his case to the CRC or defend himself with legal counsel. The rebuttal to the report was the petitioner’s best...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01697-07

    Original file (01697-07.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. Per MCO l610.llc, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three memberspresent, met on 10 January 2008 to considerpetition contained in reference (a)Removal of the fitness report for the period 20030418 to 20030829 (DC) was requested. Paragraph 3004.2c of reference (b), requires that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06583-08

    Original file (06583-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found the reviewing officer took timely action on the contested fitness report, signing it on 22 July 2003. He notes procedural errors in the completion and submission of this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08245-08

    Original file (08245-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 06544-08

    Original file (06544-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 30 June 2008, a copy of which is attached. 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 petitioner requests that this entire report be removed, or at least certain comments be expunged.