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. 
 
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  11 August 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.  The Board also considered both of the 3 June 2019 advisory opinions (AOs) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), which were 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 your fitness reports for the reporting periods 5 August 2003 to 15 September 2003 and 19 September 2003 to 27 October 2003.  The Board considered your contention that your [reporting senior (RS)] did not follow guidance provided in [MCO P1610.7E] as it pertains to exception to policy.  You argue that the reports were written for periods of less than 89 days and did not contain meaningful personal contact.    
 
The Board also considered your assertion that the markings and information provided in each report did not detail a significant and fair assessment of you, nor did they detail why an exception to policy was being invoked.  You also assert that it is extremely clear to you now the importance of cumulative value numbers and the picture it paints of a Marine’s entire career, and that unfairly assessed one-month reports, weighted the same as a 12 month report, detracts from the “hour glass” goal, which is the key initial item a board member looks for. 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the PERB that your petitions did not demonstrate probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting removal or modification of the fitness reports, in accordance with the Performance Evaluation System (PES) manual.  In this regard, PES guidance encourages reporting officials to take all possible action to reduce “not observed” fitness reports because not observed reports diminish the amount of useful information in a Marine’s performance record.  Additionally, to the extent possible, both the RS and the RO may provide comments in Sections I and K to better inform promotion and selection boards regarding the performance and potential of the Marine Reported On (MRO). 
 
The Board thus determined that the lack of Directed Comment by your RSs justifying actual observation was purely an administrative oversight, and that your requests omit any endorsement from any of your reporting officials.  The Board also noted that both of your reviewing officers (ROs) marked that they had “sufficient” observation of you during the reporting period, and that they “concur” with the respective RS’s evaluation.  Moreover, the Board determined that a RO is not constrained by the minimum observation requirements applicable to the RS, thus the evaluations remain valid. 
 
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,