DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 2677-20 
Ref: Signature Date 

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 case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2021. 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 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board also considered the 17 March 2020 advisory opinions (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB). Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal, you did not do so. 

The Board noted that, on 16 May 2018, the PERB modified your 19 August 2014 to 21 June 2015 Fitness Report by removing the Reviewing Officer’s portion of the report in its entirety. Originally, you did not dispute the Reporting Senior (RS) portion of the report. However, in your current petition, you request that the RS portion also be removed in its entirety. The Board considered your contention that this report was a result of unjust, unreasonable, biased actions and therefore resulted in a substantial error and injustice in your record. You argue that your RS was the Senior Trial Counsel at    and your RO was the Regional Trial Counsel, and also your RS’s RS, and that these conflicting relationships are the type that, at minimum, have a subconscious effect that unintentionally injects bias into the reporting process. 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO and the PERB’s finding on 27 February 2020 that the report is valid as written and filed in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual. Specifically, the Board noted that your petition omits any endorsement from your RS. Although you furnished a letter from the former Deputy Director of Judge Advocate Division, the Board noted that he was not in your reporting chain, and he did not provide any evidence of RS bias. The Board determined that your RS, a major and Senior Trial Counsel, was capable of making an independent assessment of you, especially considering that the report was processed a year prior to the documented RO’s conflict of interest. 

You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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 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, 
4/29/2021 

2