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

Docket No. 3555-20  
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. 

A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board also considered the 4 May 2020 advisory opinions (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 1 May 2017 to 14 May 2018 Fitness Report. The Board considered your contention that your Reporting Senior and Reviewing Officer (RO) marks are inconsistent, although your RO “concurred” with your RS’s markings, without justification for the difference. You also contend that your RO failed to provide Section “K” comments outlining his prior position as an instructor, which caused a misleading profile and contradictory remarks.
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO and the PERB’s finding that the report is valid as written and filed in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual. Specifically, there is no PES Manual scale to “match” RS and RO markings, nor is any such scale feasible. Additionally, RSs and ROs have different profiles, and the fact that your RO “concurred” with the RS evaluation did not constrain your RO from providing an independent assessment, therefore, no justification was required. Lastly, there is no PES Manual guidance requiring an RO to disclose any prior experience relative to profile dynamics. 

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 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, 
4/25/2021 

2