DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No: 1470-17 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United States Code, Section 1552. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2017. 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 ofthis Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters, Marine Corps (MMRP-13/PERB) dated 13 February 2017, which was previously provided to you. 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Specifically, when the Reporting Officer (RO) assumed Reporting Senior (RS) responsibilities for the reporting period, he previously had been your RO on three reports prior to the contested report and had provided observed reviews on all three reports even though he and you were geographically separated. Additionally, per the Perfonnance Evaluation System Manual co-location of a Marine Reported On (MRO) and his or her RS is not a prerequisite for a valid RS to MRO relationship. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action carmot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 

In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director