DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 9108-08
17 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 17 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 18 September 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,
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO:
1610
MMER / PERB
SEP 1 8 2008
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
me Form 149 of 11 Jun 08
tT)
“(b) MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-4
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
with three members present, met on 13 August 2008 to consider
mii con contained in reference (a).
Removal of the fitness report for the period 20020104 to 20020521
(DC) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation
directive governing submission of the report.
oe
2. The petitioner received an adverse fitness report for his
second, substantiated Level III Domestic Violence incident. In
support of his appeal he submitted copies of civilian court
documents.
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 this fitness report was
completed prior to him being tried in civilian court, during
which his case was dismissed. As such, he argues that the report
was used as a counseling tool. He aiso states that Family
Advocacy substantiated “against” him before receiving the
Civilian court ruling.
b. This fitness report was based on the petitioner’s
substantiated Level III Domestic Violence as reported by Family
Advocacy. Any related civilian charges have no bearing on this
fitness report.
c. The Board found that the petitioner has provided no
evidence to indicate that the report was used as a counseling
tool. The Board concluded that this report appropriately reports
Sub) « MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE
the petitioner’s substantiated Level III Domestic Violence in
accordance with paragraph 4003.6 b (1) (e) of reference (b). It
is clearly stated by the reviewing officer that the commanding
officer determined the petitioner to be culpable.
d. Finally, the Board notes that the petitioner chose not to
submit a rebuttal to this report thereby accepting its accuracy.
4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is thee the sontested Ji tness report should remain a part
Ree Eas
5. The case is forwarded for final action.
ETO
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Manpower Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
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 | CY2007 | 11213-07
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 this case, the Board found the petitioner contends that his lack of training and inadequate manpower affected his ability to perform his mission. The Board concluded that the reports are an accurate and honest assessment of the petitioner’s overall performance during the reporting periods.5.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02174-06
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 3004.2c(9) of reference (b), a DC report is required upon, “Substantiated findings of level three, four, or five domestic violence cases ... and after affording the MRO due process a determination by the commanding officer that the MRO is culpable.” In this case, the Board found...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03789-09
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. £ Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION, IN THE CASE OF .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00497-03
The Board was not persuaded that the contested fitness report was used as a counseling tool, nor could it find the reporting senior engaged in “blatant conjecture” by stating, in section G, that you were absent without authority on one occasion. Per subparagraph S001.3e of reference (b), a mark of unsatisfactory” in Item K3 does not constitute new adverse mateial when the Reporting Senior has already marked the Marine reported on adversely in one or more attributes in Sections D through H....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07291-05
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. Because of the requirement to comment on potential as well as their critical role inISubj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR ~ USMCsafeguarding the integrity of the PES, reviewing officer’s should make every...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01970-99
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) officer's comments from both reports. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Board (PERB), dated 16 March 1999, a copy of injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative reg 1 lations and procedures the members of the panel will be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01983-99
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 18 March 1999, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10580-07
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 26 November 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Fri Nov 03 10_20_27 CST 2000
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has added your rebuttal statement to your contested adverse fitness report for 2 July to 28 September 1992, and removed references to your not having submitted a rebuttal. the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 November 1998, a copy of which is attached. in the report of the PERB in finding that your fitness report at issue should stand.