Docket No: 1879-19 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 19 November 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, as well as the enclosed 23 October 2018 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) and your response. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 January 2009 to 26 June 2009. The Board considered your contentions that, because the information concerning your assignment to the Body Composition Program (BCP) was removed from the contested report, the report should no longer be marked adverse, and that, because the report has been changed to reflect a different reason for its adversity, your signature on the report should be considered null or you should be able to write a rebuttal to that adversity. You also contend that your reporting senior’s (RS) and reviewing officer’s (RO) comments do not match now that the BCP comments have been corrected. You also assert that your RS’s Section I comment—“contracts written were above average during the reporting period”—is evidence that you were meeting standards. The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that the contested report is administratively and procedurally correct. In this regard, the contested report is still adverse based on your drop in performance and the Section A, Item 7 mark not recommending you for promotion. The Board noted that, while your RS made positive comments regarding your performance, his comments also state that you were performing “far below standard,” as your pool growth was 57% and your net “APR was .60” during the reporting period. Moreover, your RS provided the required directed comments for the adverse mark, and your RO did not recommend you for promotion. The Board also noted the 7 February 2019 email from your RO in which he upheld his decision not to recommend you for promotion because you were not within height and weight standards. Concerning your contention that you should be permitted to write a rebuttal because the reason for the report’s adversity was changed, the Board determined that the authorized modifications by the PERB did not change or completely remove the adversity of the report. Further, you were afforded an opportunity to submit an addendum in rebuttal to the report, but you chose not to make a statement. Accordingly, the Board 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 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.