DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100	
		
		BJG
Docket No: 5727-04
13 August 2004

Dear

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 modification of the contested fitness report for 1 February to 25 March 2002 by deleting the following comment from section I: “A quiet and productive leader that shows steady improvement daily.”

Your request remove the fitness report for 27 March to 7 May 2002 was not considered, as the report does not appear in your Official Military Personnel File. Your request for retention consideration was not considered either, as you may obtain such consideration by applying to Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC).

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2004. 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 HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 July 2004, 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 in concluding that complete removal of the contested fitness report for 1 February to 25 March 2002 was not warranted. In view of the above, 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.

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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

~23

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5 103

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1610
MMER/ PERB
JUL 1 2 2004

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 FIRST LIEUTENANT USMC

	Ref:	(a) lstLt	DD Form 149 of 20 Apr 04
(b)	MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-2

1.	Per MCO l610.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 7 July 2004 to consider First Lieutenant petition contained in reference (a)
Removal of the fitness report for the period 20020201 to 20020325 (TD) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report. NOTE:   Removal of the fitness report for the period 20020327 to 20020507 was also challenged; however, that performance evaluation is not currently a matter of official record at this Headquarters -

2.	The petitioner contends the report under consideration was submitted subsequent to the completion of his period of temporary addition duty (TAD)  and that his accompishments were not included therein..

3.	In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that, with one minor exception, the report is both administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	Per the provisions of paragraph 3005 of reference (b), the report was correctly marked “not observed.” Although its preparation may have been untimely, lateness in and of itself does not invalidate a report. This is especially germane considering the “not observed” nature of the evaluation.

b.	The petitioner’s allegation that his accomplishments during the reporting period were not recorded is neither documented nor corroborated. Regardless, nothing of that nature is included in Section C of any “not observed” evaluation.

Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FIRST
USMC

c.	Given that the report is “not observed”, the Board finds the first sentence in Section I to be inappropriate. They do not, however, conclude that complete removal of the report is warranted or necessary. Instead, the Board has directed elimination of the following verbiage: “-A quiet and productive leader that shows steady improvement daily.”

4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report, as modified, should remain a part of First Lieutenant official military record. The limited corrective action identified in subparagraph 3c is considered sufficient.

5. The case is forwarded for final action.

Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
Deputy Director
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
        Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

2