DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
			        BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
                                                               2 NAVY ANNEX
				    WASHINGTON DC 2Q37O-51OO

					BJG
				Docket No:3627-07
					10 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.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 1 May to 6 July 2000 by removing section K (reviewing officer’s marks and comments)

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.

Accordingly, your application for relief beyond that effected 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, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN REPLY  REFER TO:
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 18 Dec 06
(b) MCO P1610.7E w/Ch 1-2

1.	Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 4 April 2007 to consider petition contained in reference (a) . Removal of the fitness report covering the period 20000501 to 20000706 (CH) was requested. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

2.	The petitioner contends that the reviewing officer comments are adverse and the report was never referred to him for acknowledgement and the opportunity to rebut.

3.	In its proceedings, the Board concluded that the report covering the period 20000501 to 20000706 (CH) is administratively incorrect and procedurally complete as written and filed. The following is offered as relevant:

a.	The Board found that even though the reviewing officer concurred with the reporting senior’s evaluation, his section “K” comments are negative and adverse in nature. Per reference (b), the reviewing officer had an obligation to refer his adverse appraisal to the petitioner for acknowledgment and failed to do so; therefore, the Board directed that section “K” be deleted in its entirety. This correction makes the report administratively correct.

b.	The Board also found that the reporting senior’s evaluation of the petitioner was of a satisfactory performance of duty and presented a positive word picture of the petitioner’s professional and personal character; therefore, the Board disagreed with the petitioner’s assessment that the entire report should be removed.

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

4.	The Board’s opinion, based on deliberation and secret ballot vote, is that the contested fitness report, covering the period 20000501 to 20000706 (CH), should remain a part of official military record.

5.	The case is forwarded for final action.

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

2