Docket No: 8198-19
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. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
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 30 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 16 August 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), as well as your rebuttal. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove or modify your fitness report for the reporting period 20110626 to 20120629.  The Board considered your contention that your reviewing officer (RO) was not fully aware of your accomplishments, challenges endured, and the fractious command climate faced during the reporting period.  Your RO furnished a letter endorsing the modification, not that he would have marked you as a “7” vice a “6” and that he would have added a command recommendation as well as an explanation accounting for disparity in your reporting senior’s (RS’s) marks, comments, and relative value between this report and your preceding report. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO.  In this regard, the Board noted the fact that your RS omitted a command recommendation did not preclude your RO from making his own independent recommendation at the time the report was written.  Nor does the fact that your RO did not make a command recommendation justify the modification of his existing comparative assessment marking. The Board also noted that, pursuant to the Performance Evaluation System Manual, no mechanism exists to “reset” RS profiles.  By extension, there is also no mechanism to “reset” an RO profile.  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, and 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,