DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 4391-08
9 October 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 8 October 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 30 April 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,
URdoacspleall
W. DEAN P
Executive Di
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER / PERB
APR 30 2008
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
r
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (P]
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
td
RB)
Ref: ( IpD Form 149 of 4 Jan 08
“MCO PLO10.7F
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
_ with three members present, met on 2 April 2008 to consider
3 Se Pree ctition contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 20070531 to 20070817
(FD) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner received an adverse fitness report for failure
to follow proper disbursing procedures while deployed, which
resulted in over $5000.00 that could not be accounted for. The
petitioner did not submit any additional documentation in support
of her appeal.
3. In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report is
administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and
filed. The following is offered as relevant:
a. The petitioner argues that she received a Page 11 entry
as a reprimand after the investigation into the incident was
complete, and that this fitness report was submitted before the
investigation was complete. However, Manpower Management Support
Branch (MMSB), advised the Board that the aforementioned page 11
entry is not a part of the petitioner’s Official Military
Personnel File. The Board found that since the Page i1 entry is
not a part of her record, it cannot be considered when
adjudicating this appeal.
b. The Board also found that the petitioner fails to
substantiate any of her allegations. The investigation is not
mentioned in the report, nor did the petitioner provide a copy to
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD
pens ee nn eee ON ay TRE CASE
the PERB. Without any supporting documentation, the board found
no basis to remove the report.
c. Further, the Board concluded that the report was properly
reviewed and thoroughly adjudicated by the third officer sighter.
4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report, should remain a part
oaiianiile aw i; od ee WW official military record.
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
Aon
FRANCES “S, POLETO
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06295-08
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 26 June 2008, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner does not deny his behavior, but merely that no page 11 entry exists. However, he acknowledges the existence of the entry in his The petitioner states that the fitness report was “a page 11 that I have never received and was not By mentioning its completion appeal.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03475-08
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 | 09114-08
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 | CY2008 | 06583-08
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 | CY2003 | 07244-03
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 was unable to find the contested fitness report was in reprisal for your request mast. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08245-08
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 | CY2008 | 01771-08
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 | 10437-08
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 31 March to 30 September 2002 by deleting, from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), “a non-punitive letter of caution,”. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 October 2008, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09116-08
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 the existence of probable material error or injustice. The RO states that although there are inconsistencies between the RS’ comments and the petitioner's rebuttal, “what...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01029-08
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...