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

Docket No: 5231-19 
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 9 June 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 2 May 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB).  The AO was provided to you on 2 May 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 2 April 2016 to 30 June 2016.  The Board considered your contention that Section I of your contested fitness report contains an unfavorable (velvet dagger) comment—specifically, “He is proficient at his job and is eager to learn more.”  You also contend that your reviewing officer (RO) commented that you were the best combination of technical proficiency and versatility that he has encountered in a Master Sergeant, but marked you with the majority of Master Sergeants in his profile.  You claim that both statements conflict and do not provide a clear picture to anyone reading 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 noted your contested Section I comment and determined that the sentence is not negative or intended to render your report adverse.  The Board also determined that there is no scale to match reporting official comments with attribute marks or comparative assessment marks.  Moreover, there is no requirement for RS and RO comments to match.  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,