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

JSR
Docket No. 10524-07
17 January 2008

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 reports for 1 January to 2
July 2006 and 1 January to 3 July 2006, leaving in your record the report for 1 January to 1 July 2006.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed removing the contested report for 1 January to 2 July 2006, as well as the uncontested report for 1 January to 1 July 2006, leaving in your record the contested report for 1 January to 3 July 2006.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2008. 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 November 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 PERB, while recognizing that the fitness report for the immediately following period began on 2 July 2006, which overlaps the period of the report ending 3 July 2006 that has been left in your record. The Board further noted that in the report that has been left in your record, your marks in sections G.2 (“Decision Making Ability”) and G.3 (“Judgment”) were “D” (fourth best of seven possible marks), while in the report ending 1 July 2006 that you wanted left in your record, you were marked “C” (fifth best) in those sections. In view of the above, your application for relief beyond or other than 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 THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
					3280 RUSSELL ROAD
                                                                 QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103	

                                                                                                                                      IN REPLY REFER TO
                1610
                                                   MMER/PERB

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) DD Form 149 of 30 Apr 07
(b)	MCO P16l0.7F

Per MCO l6lO.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 14 November 2007 to consider
contained in reference (a). Removal of the fitness reports for the periods 20060101 to
20060702 (CH) and 20060101 to 20060703 (CH) was requested.
Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing
submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner contends that the reports covering the periods 
20060101 to 20060703 (CH) were erroneously submitted.

3.	In its proceedings, the PERB concluded that the reports are administratively correct and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	Per paragraph 8007 of reference (b), CMC has the authority to correct fitness report records when documentary evidence indicates that the record contains erroneous information In this case, the Board found there are three reports written by the same reporting senior with two different reviewing officers that cover similar dates. The attribute markings and sections “I” and “K”, however are different. The Board also found that the petitioner fails to provide a written explanation from any of the reporting officials to explain the erroneous reports. In cases such as these, Headquarters Marine Corps considers the first report received to be the valid report. Therefore, the Board directed that the reports covering the periods 20060101 to 20060701 (CH) and 20060101 to 20060702 (CH) be deleted from the record. The Board also directed that the fitness. report covering the period 20060101 to 20060703 (CH)

Subj:	MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) P INI ON BCNR APPLICATION THE CAS E OF

be retained in the record. This correction makes the petitioner’s fitness report inventory correct.

4.	The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot
vote, is that the fitness report covering the period 20060101 to
20060703 (CH) should remain a part of official military record and the reports covering the 
periods 20060101 to 20060701 (CH) and 20060101 to 20060702 (CH) be deleted.

5. The case is forwarded for f

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