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 22 September 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 the 27 June 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 your adverse fitness report for the reporting period 1 October 2011 to 29 October 2011.  The Board considered your contention that your fitness report is inaccurate and unjust since your Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain a Unit Punishment Book entry nor does the Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS) contain a record of a nonjudicial punishment (NJP).   
 
The Board noted that the contested report states that on 29 October 2011, you underwent NJP for violating Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Articles 86 (absence without leave), 92 (failure to obey order or regulation), 107 (false official statement) and 134 (adultery).  Further, section E.1 ‘Courage’ is marked ‘A’ with justification:  “MRO lacked the courage to make correct decisions while deployed in a combat zone.  MRO put personal gratification ahead of the mission and the Marines under her care.”  Although you submitted a rebuttal statement, the Third Officer Sighter comments noted: “MRO’s rebuttal does not dispute the fact surrounding her NJP for multiple violations of the UCMJ and subsequent directed early redeployment.”    The Board concurred with the AO that the command’s failure to properly document the NJP administratively does not override the fact that disciplinary action regarding your misconduct did occur, and noted that you took full responsibility for your actions.  The Board concurred with the PERB that the contested report is administratively correct and concluded that this well-established report shall remain in your official military personnel file. 
 
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,