DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 1674-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 23 January 2019. 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. The enclosed 6 March 2018 advisory opinion (AO) 
from the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) was sent to you for an 
opportunity to comment prior to being considered by the Board. After the period for comment 
expired without a response, the case was presented to the Board. 

The Board carefully considered your desire to remove your fitness report (FITREP) for the 
reporting period 1 April 2017 to 6 April 2017. The Board considered your contentions that (1) 
your Reporting Senior (RS) was not your rightful RS, (2) you were not afforded an opportunity 
to rebut the adversity of the FITREP, because you were on temporary additional duty as a 
student at the Motor Transport NCO Operations Course when the report was submitted, and thus 
were unable to sign the report and submit a rebuttal, (3) you were not counseled and did not 
refuse to sign the report, as the FITREP claims, and (4) you were not advised to provide a 
rebuttal, as the FITREP claims. The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that, 
while the RS was not your officer-in-charge (OIC) for the reporting period, it was within your 
commander’s authority to adjust the reporting chain as circumstances warranted. Furthermore, 
the FITREP was directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps (DC), pursuant to the PES 
Manual, as a result of your non-judicial punishment, and was not-observed. The Board also 
noted that you did not provide credible evidence to support your contentions that the FITREP 
inaccurately states that were counseled and refused to sign the report, and were advised to 
provide a rebuttal. In fact, the Board noted that your phone chats reflect that you were aware of 
the FITREP’s availability on Marine Online (MOL), knew that your RS had changed and the 
FITREP was adverse, and had ample time to acknowledge the report’s adversity and submit a 
statement—indeed, you appear to have been preparing to petition the PERB on 7 June 2017 
when you directed   to send her letter to the PERB. The Board thus 
concluded that the evidence did not show the existence of a probable material error or injustice 
warranting the FITREP’s removal from your records. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot 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 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, 

4/11/2019