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

BJG
Docket No: 3618-07
11 May 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 10 May 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 11 April 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. The Board was unable to find the reporting senior never discussed with you, during the pertinent reporting period, your billet description or mission requirements. 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 22134-5103

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 29 Nov 06
(b)	MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-9

1.	Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 4 April 2007 to consider  contained in reference (a). Removal of the fitness report for the period 20050119 to 20050405 (CH) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner contends the report is unjust because it was entered into his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) without him being counseled. Furthermore, the petitioner believes that the Section “I” and “K” comments are adverse in nature and that he was not afforded an opportunity to rebut the report.

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 could not find sufficient evidence that the petitioner was never counseled before his report was entered into his OMPF. The Board found that the reporting senior signed section “J-1” attesting to the fact that he had provided a signed copy of the fitness report to the petitioner. Therefore, without substantial evidence, the Board could only conclude that the petitioner had reviewed the report.

b.	The Board did not agree with the petitioner’s assessment that comments in sections “I” and “K” are adverse in nature. They believed that the comments complement the attribute markings, which are of a qualified Marine. Finally, the Board

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

concluded that the petitioner did have the chance to raise any concerns about the report when he was given a signed copy of the report.

4.	The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a part  official military record.

5.	The case is forwarded for final action.

/

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

2