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 22 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 18 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 modify your 2 February 2018 to 13 March 2018 Fitness Report.  The Board considered your contention that the Fitness Report, covering a 38-day reporting period, was not written under any of the required circumstances for an observed report. You argue that the Reporting Senior (RS) comments do not provide enough explanation on why the report was classified as observed, in violation of the MCO 1610.7A.   
 
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, your RS was operating under the constraints of MCO 1610.7, which differed significantly in the definition of meaningful personal contact.  Moreover, your Reviewing Officer essentially admitted to cognizance of the abbreviated period covered and resultant RS invocation of policy via the Section K comment: “Board member, please consider the markings and remarks by the RS due to her daily contact with the Marine.” 
 
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, 

4/28/2021
Executive Director