DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-S 100

JSR
Docket No. 08417-07
8 November 2007

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. You requested removing the fitness report for 1 June 2005 to 18 January 2006.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report by removing section K (reviewing officer marks and comments)

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2007. 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 7 September 2007, 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 warranting complete removal of the fitness report at issue. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. The Board was unable to find you were never counseled about perceived deficiencies in your performance. 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 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

DEPARTMENT OF TI-SE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
					3280 RUSSELL ROAD
	QUANTICO, VA 22134.51 03

						IN REFER TO:
			MMER/ PERB
										SEP 07 2007

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

Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERE) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

(a)Form 149 of 10 May 07
(b)	NCO P1610.7E w/Ch l~9

1.	Per MCD 1610 11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 29 August 2007 to consider
	petition contained in reference (a) Removal of fitness report covering the period 20050601 to 20060118 (TD) was requested Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner requests that the report be removed because he contends the reviewing officer’s comments are inaccurate, misleading, negative, and confusing. He also contends he was never counseled on his deficiencies by either the reporting senior or reviewing officer.

3. In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report covering the period 20050601 to 20060118 (TB) is administratively incorrect and Procedurally incomplete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	After thorough review of the report, the Board found that the reporting senior’s evaluation is of an overall positive assessment of the petitioner’s performance, and section “C”, (Billet Accomplishments) and section  narratives enumerate a significant list of efforts and achievements.

b.	The Board found that the reviewing officer concurs with the reporting senior’s evaluation but Conflicts the evaluation in section “K-4” narrative with ambiguity, innuendoes, and administrative minutia. Therefore, the Board directed that section “K” be deleted in its entirety and replaced with a filler memorandum. This correction makes the report administratively correct and Procedurally complete.

Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORM~CE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

c.	The Board concluded that the remainder of the report is an accurate and honest assessment of the petitioner’s overall performance and should remain a valid part of the petitioner’s record.

4. The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report, covering the period 2005Q6Qj. to 20060118 (TD), should remain a part official military record with the exception of the outlined in paragraph 3(b) of this letter.

5. The case is forwarded for final action.

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

2