DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100

BJG
Docket No:8900-07
2 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 19 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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERE. 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,

								W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                    				Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
					3280 RUSSELL ROAD
                                                                 QUANTICO, VA 221 34-5103		

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        N REFER TO:
                      MMER/PERB
     										SEP 1 9 2007

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 31 May 07
(b)	MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-2

1.	Per MCO 1610.1lC, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with members present, met on 12 September 2007 to consider
contained in reference (a) . Removal of the fitness report covering the period 20010818 to 20011115 (TR) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner requests that that the report be expunged since he was, “TAD to MCAS Miramar, CA for Refresher Training in the F/A-l8 Hornet at VMFAT—l0l.”

3.	In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report covering the period 20010818 to 20011115 (TR) is administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	Per paragraph 3006.3 of reference (b), “For periods of 89 days or less, reporting seniors may submit an observed report if in their judgment, they possess sufficient observation and: The basis of the observation results from meaningful personal contact with the MRO. The information to CMC is significant and provides a fair assessment of the MRO.”

b.	The Board found that the reporting senior was clearly aware of the above provision of reference (b) when he submitted the report, since his section “I” comments acknowledge the length of his personal observation and the petitioner’s TAD period. The Board also found that the reporting senior felt he had meaningful contact with the petitioner and had significant facts of his performance to report. The reviewing officer, who had prior knowledge of the petitioner’s performance, concurred in the validity of the reporting senior’s evaluation and added
Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF

meaningful comments of his own, and recognized the petitioner as “One Of The Many Highly Qualified” in the section “K—3”, Comparative Assessment.

C.	The Board concluded that the petitioner offers no substantive facts that the report is an inaccurate or unjust account of his performance during the reporting period.

4.	The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the contested fitness report, covering the period
20010818 to 20011115 (TR) should remain a part of his official
military record

5.	The case is forwarded for final action.

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