DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 9116-08
20 November 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 20 November 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 17 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,
EN
W. DEAN PF!
Executive
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 7 2008
=
=
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCI
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCN
EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
APPLICAT ON @SNOTHE CASE OF
ane
Bi
R
Ref: DD Form 149 of 15 Jul 08
(b) MCO P1610.7F
1. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board,
Win eee members present, met on 27 August 2008 to consider
aia Wee etition contained in reference (a). Removal of
ie Bi epics report for the period 20060601 to 20060922 (TR) was
requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive
governing submission of the report.
2. The petitioner received this adverse report for being
relieved for cause aS a company commander in combat. The
reporting senior (RS) lost trust and confidence in the petitioner
and states that he demonstrated a lack of mature judgment and
leadership ability. He now argues that this report is unjust
because the reviewing officer (RO) and the third officer sighter
did not properly adjudicate the report in accordance with
reference (b). He did not submit any documentation in support of
his 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 Board found that although abbreviated, the
adjudication by the RO and third officer sighter does meet the
requirements of reference (b). The RO states that although there
are inconsistencies between the RS’ comments and the petitioner's
rebuttal, “what is not in dispute is the Battalion Commander’s
loss in confidence. .. ™ The Board does recognize that both the
RO and the third officer sighter could have written a more
detailed Baas Fee their adjudication. However, the fact
that the B& Weer &iiéved for cause is not in dispute, and alone
warrants submitting an adverse report.
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)
ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
b. In addition, the Board notes that the RS portion of this
report is extremely thorough and detailed. He fully explains his
reasons for his loss of confidence. This indicated to the Board
that a great deal of consideration went into this action and the
writing of this report.
5. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report covering the period
20060601 to 20060922 (TR), should remain a part O FREE s
ee m official military record.
6. The case is forwarded for final action.
ES S. POLETO
Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps
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 | CY2003 | 06067-03
In addition, you requested that the fitness report for 1 to 6 June 2001 be modified, by changing the beginning date from 1 June 2001 to 22 December 2000, and removing the reporting senior (RS)‘s section I comment: “This report was drafted and resubmitted to replace a previously submitted report lost in the administrative mailing process.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2003. In...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05169-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 10 October 2007 to 30 March 2008, a copy of which is at Tab A. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the following fitness report and related material: Period of Report From To 10 Oct 07 30 Mar 08 ‘Date of Report 17 Jul 08 b. e....
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 | CY2006 | 10210-06
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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 8 November 2006, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (Mb), dated 21...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01458-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:1458-079 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) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 13 May to 31 October 2005 by removing section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments)A three-member...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11165-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:11165-0623 January 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) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 1 January to 5 February 2002 by changing section K.6 to show you did not attach a statement...
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 | CY2007 | 09135-07
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 (PERE), dated 21 September 2007, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 28 October 2007.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10975-06
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the reports.2. Concerning the fitness report covering the period 20040701 to 20040909 (DC), per paragraph 1005 of reference (b), reporting senior’s are prohibited from using the report as a disciplinary or counseling tool. In regard to the report covering the period 20040910 to 20050625 (TR), the Board found that it does not appear that the petitioner was at a disadvantage nor is there any evidence to...