Dear : 
 
This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel 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 this 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 30 July 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the 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 remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 June 2016 to 30 June 2017.  The Board considered your contention that your performance rating dropped from the last report from the same reporting officials with no counseling for substandard performance.  You assert that the verbiage in the report is outstanding and does not reflect the performance marks. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO.  In this regard, the Board noted that your application omits any endorsement from your reporting officials, and that you failed to provide any evidence that your performance or conduct warranted higher marks than you received during the reporting period.  The Board also noted that each report is based on a discrete and finite period of performance and there is no Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual guidance that mandates that individual reports conform to previous or subsequent evaluations.  
  
Moreover, your report is comprised of attribute markings of D and E, and therefore the markings require no justification or even elaboration.  Your reporting chain was not required to counsel you for substandard performance because none is noted in the report.  Lastly, there is no scale to “match” RS attribute markings with Section I comments, and by extension, this guidance also applies to the reviewing officer comparative assessment marking.  The Board thus concluded that this report is deemed valid as written. 
 
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 matters, which will require you to 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 attachés 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,