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

Docket No. 11635-19
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear Major 

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 25 February 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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in HQMC letter 1610 MMRP-13/PERB of 9 December 2019 along with your response to the opinion.
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in November 2005. On 31 May 2016, you received a fitness report that contained the same marks as your previous fitness report.  In July 2019, you submitted a request to change your May 2016 fitness report grades to an average of 5.14.  As part of your request, you submitted an endorsement from your May 2016 Reporting Senior in which she reported making an administrative error by assigning the same grades as your previous report.  On 13 November 2019, the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) concluded that the May 2016 fitness report should not be changed. The decision was based on your delay in requesting a change to the fitness report and the fact it was unlikely your performance significantly increased over the three-month period from your last fitness report since you were still performing the same duties. You provided a rebuttal to the PERB decision by pointing out that your Reporting Senior reported that she made an administrative error.
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that your fitness report from May 2016 should be changed to reflect an average grade of 5.14.  You assert that your Reporting Senior made an administrative mistake by assigning you the same grades as your last fitness report.  You argue that your scores were not consistent with your performance or the comments received.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in your case.  Specifically, the Board agreed with the PERB rationale that it was unlikely that your performance over the three months between your last O-3 fitness report and your first O-4 fitness report in May 2016 increased exponentially to merit the substantial increase in grades you requested.  The fact you were performing the same duties during this period also factored into the Board’s finding that your performance likely did not improve significantly. Further, the Board also agreed that the delay in requesting the change to your fitness report reduces the credibility of the claim that the assigned marks were the result of an administrative error by the Reporting Senior. After considering the totality of the evidence, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence did not support relief in your case. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.
  
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,