DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

			BJG
	Docket No: 4330-06 
	7 December 2006

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 7 December 2006. 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 26 October 2006, 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 PERE. The Board was unable to find you were not counseled about perceived deficiencies, noting the reporting senior says you had both formal and informal counseling on numerous occasions. In this regard, the Board generally does not grant relief on the basis of an alleged absence of counseling, as counseling takes
many forms, so the recipient may not recognize it as such when it is provided. In view of the above, 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,

								W. DEAN PFEIFFER
								Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE COI~PS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
	QUANTICO. VIRGINIA 221 34-5103

					I N REFER TO:

                                                 MMER/PERB 
                                                 OCT 26 2006

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)

	Ref:	(a)	DID Form 149 of 7 May 06
		(b)	MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-9

1.	Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with  present, met on 18 October to consider petition contained in reference (a) . Removal of the fitness report covering the period 20050616 to 20051031 (SA) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner contends that the adverse report is unfair and contains obvious inaccuracies. The petitioner addresses seven areas that he perceives to be inaccurate.

3.	In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report covering the period 20050616 to 20051031 (SA) is administratively correct and procedurally complete as written arid filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	The Board found that the petitioner acknowledged the reporting senior’s adverse evaluation and submitted a seven page rebuttal. The reviewing officer thoroughly adjudicated the differences between the evaluation and the petitioner’s rebuttal contentions.

b.	The Board also found that the petitioner offers no new arguments that were not previously considered and addressed by the reviewing officer. The Board concluded that the petitioner in fact had his issues resolved when the general officer sighter presented his succinct review of the entire report and concluded there are no further unresolved factual inconsistencies or disagreements, or new information requiring further comment.”

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

4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report, covering the period 200506l6to 20051031 (SA), should remain a part official military record

5. The case is forwarded for final action.

Chairperson, Performance
Evaluation Review Board
Personnel Management Division
Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps

2