DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100

BJG
Docket No:9701-06
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 PERB. The Board found the supporting statement from Lieutenant Colonel He commendatory but not persuasive, as he indicated he had not begun working with you until after the reporting period in question. 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 CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO. VIRGINIA  22134

				IN REPLY REFER TO:
											1610 NMER/PERB
											OCT 2 6 2006

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
	
	(a)	Form 149 of 28 Jan 06
	(b)	MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-8

1.	Per MCO l610.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 18 October 2006 to consider

petition contained in reference (a) Removal the fitness report for the period 20020924 to 20030523 (CD) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2. The petitioner contends the report should be removed because the reporting senior showed bias and retaliation for unforeseen events that took place while he was on recruiting duty.

3. In its proceedings, the PERB 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 the petitioner acknowledges the adverse nature of the report in his attached rebuttal statement and states that he understood why the Commanding Officer removed him as the SNCOIC. The petitioner also acknowledged he received counseling on his leadership on 9 May, 2003 from the Commanding Officer, who informed him that he and his Marines needed to lead by example. The Board also found that the petitioner was counseled by the Sergeant Major for missing two monthly recruiting mission goals. Finally, the Board concluded that the report was properly reviewed and third officer sighted.

b.	The Board believed that the fitness report was an honest and accurate assessment of the petitioner’s overall performance.

4.	The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report, covering the period
20020924 to 20030523 (CD), should remain a part official military record

5. The case is forwarded for final action.