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 applications were not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your cases on their merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your applications 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 this Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your applications, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, as well as the 27 May 2020 decision by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) (the PERB Decision), and the 23 March and 2 April 2020 Advisory Opinions provided to the PERB by the Manpower Management Division Records & Performance Branch (MMRP-30) (the AOs).  The PERB Decision and the AOs were provided to you on 28 May 2020, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response.  Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal, you did not do so. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to modify your 21 April 2007 to 2 July 2007 Transfer (TR) Fitness Report and your 9 October 2010 to 31 May 2011 Annual (AN) Fitness Report.   
 
With regard to your TR report, the Board considered your contentions that your Reporting Senior (RS) did not have meaningful personal contact during the 73-day reporting period, that your RS failed to invoke an exception to policy in Section I comments for writing an observed report for an observation period less than 89 days, and that you were compared against other officers whom your RS had a proper opportunity to observe.  With regard to your AN report, the Board considered your contention that the RS markings on the report were improperly “gamed” for purposes of managing the RS’s profile.   
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the PERB Decision that your petitions did not demonstrate probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting modification of your reports.  Despite MMRP-30’s recommendation to modify your TR report, the Board determined that the reports are valid as written and filed, in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation Manual guidance.  In this regard, the Board noted that the lack of timeliness of the petitions detract from their credibility and legitimacy.  Moreover, the TR report, processed in 2007 when you were a captain, and the AN report processed in 2011 when you were a major, were in your record when you were selected to lieutenant colonel.  Lastly your Reviewing Officer for each report certified that he had sufficient observation of you during the respective reporting periods, and concurred with your RSs’ evaluations.  
 
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, 
 
6/2/2021

Executive Director