DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6562-18 Ref: Signature Date Dear This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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, a 31 July 2018 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The AO was provided to you on 31 July 2018, 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 the fitness reports for the reporting periods 2 August 2014 to 30 April 2015, and 1 May 2015 to 30 April 2016. The Board considered your contention that in accordance with the Performance Evaluation System (PES) manual, reporting senior’s (RS) must take care when making Section I comments to ensure the comments neither conflict with, nor obscure, the evaluation. You contend that the Section I comments do not correlate with the relative value of each report and note that RSs should avoid the temptation to intentionally mark attributes in a manner that ensures the relative value will be at the bottom of their profile, while simultaneously writing laudatory comments in Section I to mislead the Marine Reported On into believing the overall report is laudatory. You further contend that the reporting senior (RS) Section I comments in both fitness reports were written in a laudatory manner, while the report averages fall below the RS’s average. As part of the review process, the PERB reviewed your request and provided an AO to the Board. The Board substantially concurred with the AO’s opinion that the contested reports are administratively and procedurally correct. In this regard, the Performance Evaluation System (PES) manual, does not provide a scale to match the attribute markings with the Section I comments, nor is such a scale feasible or attainable. Additionally, the perceived competitiveness of a report’s relative value or comparative assessment mark is not a basis for removing or modifying the report. The Board noted that the reports are below the RS’s average; however, the Board found no evidence that the reports were not written in compliance with the PES manual. Additionally, the Board did not find the RS comments misleading or written in a deceptively laudatory manner. The Board concluded that the contested reports are neither in error nor unjust, and will remain unchanged in your record. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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.