DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
Docket No. 3942-20 
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 4 May 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 17 July 2017 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 determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

The Board carefully considered your request to modify or remove your 18 November 2015 to 31 May 2016 Fitness Report. The Board considered your contention that your reporting senior (RS) observed your performance for only 62 days during the reporting period. You also contend that he failed to establish observation resulting from meaningful personal contact, and he failed to justify in Section I why an exception to policy was invoked. 

The Board noted that your next fitness report, in the same billet for a nine-month reporting period, written by the same RS, resulted in a nearly identical evaluation, which you do not contest. The Board thus determined that you failed to provide any evidence that your performance or conduct during the reporting period warranted higher marks than you received, or that your RS was not aware of your efforts or tracking you in your duties as the S-4 Officer­in-Charge while deployed to     . Moreover, although the observation time during the reporting period was limited, the Board noted that a member and the reporting officials are not required to be co-located in order for observation to occur. 

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, 
5/13/2021 

2