Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2021.  The names and votes of the panel members will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of the Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  The Board also considered the 7 November 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), which was previously provided to you.  Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal, you did not do so. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to modify the reviewing officer (RO) comparative assessment marks on three of your fitness report for the reporting periods 31 May 2011 to 31 May 2012, 1 June 2012 to 1 September 2012, and 2 September 2012 to 30 June 2013.  The Board also considered your request to remove all failures of selection.  The Board considered your contention that, after a tour in the Pentagon, your RO’s grading philosophy changed and he provided a memorandum for the record indicating that the comparative assessment marks [on your contested fitness reports] should be changed from 6 to  7.  You assert that this error in marking led to your failures of selection to lieutenant colonel  
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO and the PERB’s finding that the reports are valid as written and filed, in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation System Manual.  Specifically, a career counselor’s insight, which is based on professional observations regarding future competitiveness does not necessarily constitute any clear violation of pertaining PES Manual guidance.  Additionally, your RO’s letter to the promotion board advocating for your promotion does not constitute an official endorsement for modification to your record. Finally, the perceived competitiveness of the reports’ comparative assessment mark is not a basis for modifying the reports. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require that you complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,