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

Docket No: 2302-19 
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 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 8 January 2008.  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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board also considered the enclosed 6 November 2018 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, you did not do so. 

The Board carefully considered your request to modify or remove your fitness report for the reporting period 6 March 2007 to 31 May 2007, and to remove your failure of selection (FOS) to the grade of lieutenant colonel.  The Board considered your contention that the fitness report is less than 90 days of observation, and that for periods of 89 days or less, reporting seniors (RSs) shall not submit an observed report unless their observation results from meaningful personal contact that is not normally obtainable in a standard work setting.  You contend that your RS and reviewing officer (RO) did not have adequate time to assess your abilities or performance.  You also argue that there was not meaningful personal contact with your RS as a result of a significant increase in work hours over the entire reporting period and that there was not a significant increase in the quality of observation. You also contend that your RS did not justify in Section I why the exception to policy was being invoked, and he did not include the circumstances resulting in meaningful personal contact. 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that your RS made significant comments in Section I that indicate that he felt justified in rendering the report observed, and the fact that he failed to make the required statement was a harmless administrative error.  The Board thus concluded that the report does not constitute probable material error or injustice warranting corrective action, and that, without such corrective action, removal of your FOS is unwarranted. 

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.  

Sincerely,