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

Docket No: 10022-19                                                           
Ref: Signature Date 


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 10 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  The Board also considered the 24 October 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), which was previously provided to you.  Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal to the AO, you did not do so. 

The Board carefully considered your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 June 2016 to 23 June 2017.  The Board considered your contentions that your reporting senior (RS) made adverse Section I comments, and you were not afforded the opportunity to provide rebuttal.  You also contend that you were not counseled until the processing of the report, and that the report was submitted late.  The Board noted that the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) modified the contested report by redacting the Section I, (Directed and Additional Comments), “Developed a greater understanding of a commander’s need to closely supervise his command group members implementation of procedural change and make in-progress course corrections in order to ensure his vision balanced desired productivity improvements with command climate awareness.” 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO, and that the report, as modified by the PERB, is valid.  In this regard, the Board noted that, although your contention that the report was submitted late is valid, it does not necessarily invalidate the report.  Additionally, because your reporting chain did not process the report as adverse, there was no requirement and/or justification for a rebuttal, and the Performance Evaluation System manual does not require formal counseling prior to submitting reports.  Lastly, the Board noted that you did not provide any evidence that your RS neglected to provide a fair assessment of your performance; the perceived competitiveness of a report’s relative value is not a basis for removing the report. 

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. 

Sincerely,