Docket No: 7014-19 
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 15 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, as well as the 5 July 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB).  The AO was provided to you on 5 July 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 1 July 2016 to 28 June 2017.  Alternatively, you request to remove your section I statements, “produces desired results most times with minimal supervision"; "satisfactory and are on par with a majority of his administrative peers.  He continues to challenge himself to master the intricacies of his current billet;" “When focused, he demonstrates the potential for continued professional growth;” "Promote with peers;" "SNCO continues to develop and grow in all aspect of being a Marine;" "Striving to learn his MOS;" "Untapped potential;" and "With continued effort, focus, determination, and drive, this SNCO will develop into an outstanding Marine leader and administrator".  The Board considered your contentions that according to the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual, reporting officials should avoid negative phrases and their implication unless the intent is to render the report adverse, and they should avoid comments identifying minor limitations, shortcomings, occasional lapses, or weakness in an otherwise overall positive performance. You claim that the contested statements serve no constructive purpose, foster a zero defect mentality, are most often counseling comments, and are not germane to the overall evaluation.    
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO that your fitness report is valid and should be retained as modified.  In this regard, the Board noted that the PERB approved corrections to your fitness report by removing your section I statements, “. . . produces desired results most times with minimal supervision” and “When focused, he demonstrate the potential for continued professional growth.”  The Board also noted your remaining section I comments and determined that they are not negative or adverse in nature.  The Board also determined that the approved corrections to your fitness report are sufficient and found no justification to remove your contested fitness report.  The Board thus concluded that there is no probable material error or injustice warranting further 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 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,