Docket No. 3569-20
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  1 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 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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in HQMC letter 1610 MMRP-13/PERB of 4 May 2020; a copy of which was previously provided to you by the Marine Corps. 
 
In 2019, you were received a fitness report covering the period of 1 June 2018 through 30 April 2019 while assigned  as a Company Commander and .  Your report reflected a 3.29 average with a relative value of 84.52.  Your Reporting Senior was the Battalion Commander and your Reviewing Officer (RO) was the .  The Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) determined that your request to have the fitness report removed from record was without merit.  The PERB concluded your RO was appropriate in light of your dual duty assignment within  and that no requirement exists for the  Commanding General (CG) to approve a change in your RO. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that the fitness report in question be removed as a violation of Marine Corps fitness report requirements.  You assert that it was erroneous for the  to be assigned as your RO since all the other Company Commanders had the Information Group Commanding Officer assigned as their RO.  Additionally, you argue that your report is invalid since the  did not approve the change to the reporting chain.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in your case.  Specifically, the Board determined the report in question should remain in your record unchanged since there was a reasonable basis for assigning the  as your RO, unlike your peers, and no requirement exists for the  to approve changes in reporting chains.  In reviewing the fitness report, the Board agreed with the PERB that allowing the  to be your RO in the fitness report in question was not prohibited since he observed your performance as the.  In your capacity as  Director with  you produced work product for the on a regular basis.  In the Board’s opinion, the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that your intelligence related work requirements allowed the G-2 to sufficiently observe you during this period to accurately report on your performance in his capacity as the RO.  Finally, the Board also found no requirement that the  approve a change to a reporting chain for a fitness report.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
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,