DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6249-20 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 29 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 application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, as well as the 11 August 2020 decision furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), and 26 May 2020 advisory opinion (AO) provided to the PERB by the Manpower Management Division Records & Performance Branch (MMRP-30). The PERB decision and AO were provided to you on 11 August 2020, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response. When you did not provide a response, your case was submitted to the Board for consideration. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 June 2017 to 31 May 2018. The Board considered your contention that your reporting senior (RS) provided erroneous marks and lacked impartiality in the evaluation of your performance. You also contend that your section I statement referencing your “transition” inferred a derogatory change of duty, although your billet assignment was changed due to the needs of the team. You claim that your RS used both unconscious and conscious bias by marking attribute marks lower than they should have been and your other reports are more adequate evaluations of your performance. As evidence, you provided correspondence from other officers that served with your RS. The Board, however, substantially concurred with the PERB decision and AO that your fitness report is valid and should be retained as filed. In this regard, the Board noted your evidence, however the Board found it insufficient to substantiate that your RS was bias. The Board found no evidence that your attributes marks were assigned erroneously or that your performance and conduct warranted higher marks than you received and you provided none. The Board also noted your section I statement, “MRO transitioned early in the reporting period from the S-4 to be Civil Military Operation Advisor the Liaison Team” and determined that term ‘transition’ in the context of the statement does not infer that your transition was derogatory. Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting corrective action. 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, 7/16/2021 Executive Director