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

Docket No: 4468-19 
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 12 May 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 enclosed 10 April 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB).  The AO was provided to you on 10 April 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 fitness report for the reporting period
4 January 2018 to 30 June 2018.  The Board considered your contentions that you did not meet with your reporting senior (RS) to create your billet description, did not work with your RS until four months after your arrival, and your RS did not establish your duties and responsibilities.  You claim that you had three different billet descriptions, had very little interaction with the RS, and did not believe the officer should be your RS because you had an altercation with him.  You also contend that your RS did not sufficiently observe, evaluate and accurately report your performance, professional qualities, and potential, and you were not counseled on your fitness report.
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that your fitness report is valid and should be retained as filed.  In this regard, the Board found no evidence that your performance and conduct warranted higher marks, and you provided none.  The Board opined that the circumstances surrounding your assignment were not ideal, however, the Board determined that your circumstances do not invalidate your fitness report.  Concerning your contentions that the RS and Marine Reported On (MRO) relationship was not established and you were not counseled, the Board determined that Marine Corps Order (MCO) 1610.7A, the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual, provides that the RS should counsel the MRO throughout the reporting period, but counseling is not required and the lack of counseling does not invalidate the fitness report.  The Board also determined that a billet description is fluid, thus it may be adjusted at any time.  Additionally, the Board reasoned that as the G-1 Operations Officer and the Deputy G-1 your reporting officials held the appropriate billets to act as your RS and reviewing officer.  Moreover, the Board concluded that a personality conflict between the MRO and RS is not a basis to remove your fitness report, thus 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,