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

Docket No: 1514-19 
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 21 January 2020.  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, as well as the 2 January 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB).  The AO was provided to you on 2 January 2019, 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 your reviewing officer (RO), Section K comparative assessment mark and comments from your fitness report for the reporting period 14 June 2016 to 2 June 2017.  The Board considered your contention that the RO mark could be biased or a mistake because you were not counseled that your performance was the lowest of all Majors in the RO’s profile.  You also contend that the RO concurred with the reporting senior (RS), but the word picture is not consistent with the RS’s word picture, and you received an end of tour award.
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that the contested report is administratively and procedurally correct.  In this regard, the Board found no evidence, and you provided none, that the RO was biased or that his assessment of your performance was not an accurate assessment of your performance during the reporting period.  The Board determined that in compliance with chapter 4, paragraph 14.b(5)(a)2 of the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual, the RO provided sufficient amplifying comments, commented on your future assignments and promotion potential.  Concerning your contention that the RO did not counsel you, the Board determined that the RO must “make every reasonable effort to know the professional capabilities of the Marines whose reports they review.” The PES Manual does not require the RO to counsel Marines on the comparative assessment mark, nor is the RO bound by the RS comments or awards.  Moreover, a report is not considered unjust solely because the comparative assessment mark is lower than other reports.  The Board thus concluded that there is no probable material error or injustice warranting corrective action. 

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. 

Sincerely,