DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3556-19 Ref: Signature Date 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. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board also considered the enclosed 5 March 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, you did not do so. The Board carefully considered your request to remove and replace Section I comments in your grade change (GC) fitness report for the reporting period 7 February 2010 to 11 September 2010. The Board considered your contention that your reporting officials’ comments “SNM is a quiet” and “while reserved” are not in compliance with the Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual. The Board, however, concurred with the AO and noted that, while the descriptors “quiet” and “reserved” may not be preferred by most Marines, they do represent reporting official selected adjectives that describe your observed personality, and when considered within their full context, do not constitute negative phrases as proscribed in the PES Manual. Additionally, the Board noted that your request to “add comments” was not expounded upon for proper context. The Board also noted that, although not specifically raised by you, a Section K comment in your GC fitness report was deemed negative, and that the Marine Corps’ course of action was to redact the comment “as a SNCO, [you] must work to give more authoritative direction and take charge.” The Board thus concluded that your contested GC fitness report, as modified by the PERB, is now administratively and procedurally correct as written and filed. The Board also carefully considered your request to modify your annual (AR) fitness report for the reporting period 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2011. The Board considered your contention that the “from” date is incorrect and should be changed to “20100912,” and that several of your reporting officials’ comments are negative, and not in compliance with the PES Manual. The Board noted that the Marine Corps’ course of action to redact those, and other, negative comments, from Section I and Section K was as follows: “[you are] a SNCO with the potential to be a good leader” (Section I); “[you do] need to hone [your] leadership skills however” (Section K); and “having observed this Marine for several years, I’m convinced [you have] excellent potential but needs guidance in uncovering it and developing it” (Section K). The Board, however substantially concurred with the AO that the Section I comment, “[you] would do well by attending PME (professional military education) for [your] grade in order to improve upon [your] military skills, leadership and professional development as a SNCO” is not materially different from any other relatively standard comment regarding PME, and it is not deemed negative. Also, the Section I comment “briefer I would rate this Marine a 3.5” is not deemed negative. The AO noted that your reporting senior has apparent promotion board membership experience and his comment is considered within an acceptable context of comparative assessment. The Board noted that your contention that the report “from” date is incorrect and should be modified to 20100912 constitutes an administrative change. Nevertheless, the Board determined that the date gap caused by this error is less than 30 days, and is considered an acceptable deviation by the PES Manual, and that it is a harmless error. The Board thus determined that the reports, as modified by the PERB, do not constitute an inaccuracy or injustice warranting removal or additional modifications. 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, 5/15/2020