DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 8711-20 Ref: Signature Date MSGT Dear Master Sergeant : 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 14 September 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 9 December 2020 decision furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), and the 26 October 2020 advisory opinion (AO) provided to the PERB by the Manpower Management Division Records & Performance Branch (MMRP-30). The PERB decision and the AO were provided to you on 9 December 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 fitness report for the reporting period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019 by removing your reviewing officer’s (RO’s) comparative assessment mark. The Board considered your contentions that your RO was bias and deliberately appointed himself as your RO after the end of the reporting period. You also contend that your RO submitted your fitness report ten days before the promotion board deadline and based his assessment on your performance during the last nine days of the reporting period. You claim that your RO penalized you for contacting him multiple times while he was transitioning to another command. You also claim that the late submission of your fitness report took away your ability to write the promotion board to explain why you received a low comparative assessment mark. As evidence, you furnished an email to your RO and correspondence from your former RO. 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 that according to the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual, a report is not considered unjust solely because the comparative assessment mark is rated lower than other reports. The Board also noted the correspondence you furnished, however, the Board found no evidence that your commanding officer’s observation of your performance was insufficient or that his decision to serve as your RO was bias or based on malicious intent and you provided none. The Board determined that your fitness report was prepared and processed according to regulations and the late submission of a fitness report does not invalidate the reporting officials’ evaluation of your performance. Moreover, the Board found no evidence that the late submission of your fitness report was intentional or intended to deprive you of the opportunity to submit a letter to the promotion board. 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, 9/24/2021 Executive Director