DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 6544-08
28 August 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.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested report for 8 February to 21
April 2008 by removing from section I (reporting senior’s
“Directed and Additional Comments”) “[You have] limited growth
potential.” .
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 August 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 June 2008, a copy of which is
attached.
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 for relief beyond that effected by
CMC has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the
panel will be furnished upon request.
Tt 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 PFET R
Executive Dir
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER/PERB
JUN 3G anng
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTTIV] DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY, OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
Ref: (a) ical MOMHD Form 149 of 10 gun 08
(b) MCO P1610.7F
Ll. per MCO 1610.11¢C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
wih three members present, met on 25 June 2008 to consider
iT 55 on contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 20080208 to 20080421
(CH) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner requests that this entire report be removed,
or at least certain comments be expunged. He argues that the
report contains negative comments and that he was never
counseled, nor was he afforded the Opportunity to “argue his
case”. He did not submit any additional document in support of
his appeal
3. In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report has a
correctible administrative error but is procedurally complete as
written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:
The Board agreed with the petitioner that the report does
mment in Section “I”, and has directed
Beier has limited growth
a.
contain an inappropriate co
the removal of the phrase,®
potential.”
b. The remaining comments appealed by the petitioner, the
Board found to be in compliance with reference (b). Therefore,
there is no basis to remove them. The petitioner requested that
the comments referencing his medical condition be removed,
however the Board found that those comments serve as
justification for his inability to take a Physical Fitness Test
(PFT) or fire on the rifle range. They are factual statements
and reportable in accordance with reference (b).
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNE APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
Q -
we
a
parte
c. Finally, the petitioner argues that he was not afforded
the opportunity to argue his case. The Board notes that because
this was not submitted as an adverse report, there is no
provision for the petitioner to have rebutted the report.
However, the Board appreciates the petitioner’s desire to do go
in light of the adverse comment in Section “I”, however, this
Board has approved the removal of that comment, thus rendering
this argument moot.
F CES 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 03521-09
However, in only 60 days since the end of his last reporting period, I cannot say that he has moved up in his peer ranking.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 1 April 2009, a copy of which is attached. Removal of the fitness reports for the periods 19990101...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 05397-04
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BJGDocket No:5397-045 August 2004This 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 that the contested fitness report for 1 October 2002 to21 February 2003 be modified by deleting the mark from item 6.c(disciplinary action”)A...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02619-07
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...
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 | CY2008 | 06585-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the undated report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), a copy of which is attached. The Board further noted that...
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 | CY2006 | 06678-06
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 | 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.