BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
					    2 NAVY ANNEX
				          WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

BJG
Docket No 2240-08
3 April 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, in effect, that the fitness report for 9 September 2006 to 30 September 2007 be modified, in accordance
with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) undated endorsement on your letter of 30 October 2007 to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, by raising the marks in sections E.2 (“Effectiveness under Stress”) and G.l (“Professional Military Education”) from “B” (sixth best of seven possible marks) to “D” (fourth best) and sections F.5 (“Communication Skills”) and G.3 (“Judgment”) from “B” to “C” (fifth best)

A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 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 3 March 2008, 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 has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report in question, you may submit the RS’s endorsement to future selection boards.

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