Docket No. 6897-19
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 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 29 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 fitness report for the reporting period 7 September 2017 15 April 2018.  The Board considered your contentions that your reporting senior (RS) was not your direct supervisor during the reporting period.  Instead, the acting commanding officer was the first officer in your reporting chain and that he was directly responsible for your daily activities and the one who had daily observation of you during this seven month period.  You assert that several of the items captured in the billet accomplishments of this fitness report are executive officer-like in nature, and that this is indicative of the fact that you absorbed many of the duties of the executive officer and was tasked daily by the acting commanding officer. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO.  In this regard, the Board determined that you failed to provide any evidence that your performance or conduct warranted higher marks than you received for your fitness report.  Additionally, the Board noted that, although you were not physically co-located with your reporting chain for an extended span of the reporting period, this fact does not necessarily invalidate the report because the operational construct captured in this report is not unusual for Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) functionality, as they are routinely called upon to conduct split operations and it is also not unusual for any deployed command that utilizes a Remain Behind Element (RBE) to maintain established reporting chains despite extended physical separation. The Board concluded that you and your reporting officials were not required to be co-located in order for observation to occur.  
 
The Board also noted that a modification to the established reporting chain did not occur, and even though your billet accomplishments included some executive officer-like duties, you remained the MEU Assistant Operations Officer. The Board thus concluded that this report is deemed valid as written. 
 
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 attachés 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,