Docket No: 8337-19
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 
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 both of the 29 August 2019 advisory opinions (AO) furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), which were 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 reports for the reporting periods 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 and 1 July 2015 to 26 April 2016, and to remove all failures of selection. The Board considered your assertion that removing the reports will restore your master sergeant profile to an accurate, objective picture of your 20-plus year career. You contend that the reports are inconsistent with the reporting senior (RS) Section I Comments, your agreed upon performance, and other evaluations that you have received in-grade while performing in the same billet. You allege that your RS arbitrarily assigned attribute marking in Sections D, E, F, and G in order to maintain a preconceived fitness report average for master sergeants and that he did not objectively evaluate your performance based on merit, resulting in an unwarranted below RS average report.  You also contend that your RS neglected to comment on your promotion potential in violation of the Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual guidance. You assert that your report ending 26 April 2016 is a nearly identical, unwarranted below RS average report. You argue that your reviewing officer (RO) simply cut and pasted the exact same comments from the previous report. 

The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO. In this regard, the Board noted that you did not provide any evidence, beyond your statement, that your performance and conduct warranted higher marks than you received on your fitness reports, and that the e-mail from your RS explicitly confirms his evaluation as intentional and valid as written. The Board also noted that each unique fitness report is written for a discrete period of performance and has no direct bearing on past reports or future reports. Next, there is no scale to “match” the attribute markings with the Section I comments. Lastly, although your contention that your RS omitted a comment regarding your promotion potential, this omission does not necessarily invalidate the report because he marked Section A, Item 7 in the “Yes” block. 

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,