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 6 October 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 5 July 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 change the reviewing officer’s (RO’s) comparative assessment from the ‘7’ block to the ‘8’ block for your fitness report covering the period 1 June 2012 to 31 January 2013 and to change the RO’s comparative assessment from the ‘6’ block to the ‘8’ block for the report covering the period 1 February 2013 to 31 May 2013.  You argued that the comparative assessment marks in both fitness reports are unjust because your RO used the reports as a means of reprisal after you were directed to execute a preliminary inquiry in which you recommended a command investigation.  The Board noted that you included letters of support from a sergeant major and lieutenant colonel who were members in the command during the period covered by the fitness reports. 
 
The Board noted that the PERB modified the contested report ending 31 May 2013 by marking the comparative assessment from block ‘6’ to block ‘7’.  The Board agreed with the AO that there was sufficient evidence to show that you had consistent performance in back-to-back reporting cycles as your reporting senior (RS) assessed the report with a 100.00 relative value, the same as the prior report.  
 
The Board also agreed with the AO that there was evidence to support the RO downgrading the assessment from an ‘8’ to a ‘7’ on the report ending 31 January 2013 as your billet changed from one that was above your grade to one more in line with your grade.  The Board determined that there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none to support your allegation of reprisal.  The Board thus concluded that the reports shall be retained as filed in your OMPF. 
 
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,