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

Docket No. 4558-20  

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 applications on 3 June 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 9 June 2020 decision by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) (the PERB Decision), and the 6 May 2020 Advisory Opinion provided to the PERB by the Manpower Management Division Records & Performance Branch (MMRP-30) (the AO).  The PERB Decision and the AO were provided to you on 12 June 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 remove your 2 June 2017 to 30 June 2018 Fitness Report.  The Board considered your contention that your Reporting Officials’ markings do not match their respective comments.  You also contend that the Reporting Senior (RS) attribute markings are unjustifiably low and designed to prevent any further advancement due to a personal conflict that dates back to when you and your RS were both gunnery sergeants.   Additionally, you assert that no other fitness reports indicates a problem with your conduct, and that your Reporting Officials never offered any mentorship.  Lastly, you assert that you did not see this fitness report until after you changed duty stations.   

The Board noted that the PERB modified the contested fitness report by redacting a portion of your Reviewing Officer’s comments.  The Board, thus substantially concurred with the AO and the PERB Decision that the report, as modified by the PERB, is valid as written and filed, in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual guidance. Specifically, there is no scale to ‘match’ the attribute markings with the Section I comments, nor is any such scale feasible.  Moreover, you failed to provide any evidence, beyond your statement, that your performance and conduct warranted higher grades than you received on the fitness report. 

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, 
6/21/2021 

Executive Director