Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 10 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  The Board also considered the 15 October 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 to the AO, you did not do so. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 9 October 2018 to 17 April 2019.  The Board considered your contentions that you were never counseled regarding your performance, and that you received your billet description while filling Fleet Assistant Program orders just ten days prior to the end of the reporting period.  You also contend that your reviewing officer (RO) failed to write an observed report, although he had sufficient observation of you during the reporting period, and that the report was written in retaliation after you reported allegations of harassment, and submitted an Inspector General (IG) complaint.  The Board noted that the PERB modified Section A (Administrative Information) of your report by removing “3529” and replacing it with “8014” per MCO 1200.17E, the Military Occupational Specialty Manual. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO, and that the report, as modified by the PERB, is valid.  In this regard, the Board noted that MCO 1610.7A does not require reporting seniors (RSs) to provide formal counseling for reports devoid of grades or comments constituting substandard performance.  Next, with regard to your contention that your RO had sufficient observation of you, the Board noted that there is no hard guidelines set forth in the PES Manual on what constitutes sufficient knowledge and observation.  Moreover, you failed to identify any specific material error in the actual report to perhaps justify your contention that your RO did not adequately review your RS’s evaluation of you.  Lastly, the Board noted that you did not provide any evidence that your RS neglected to provide a fair assessment of your performance; the perceived competitiveness of a report’s relative value is not a basis for removing the report. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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,