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 28 July 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  The Board also considered the 13 May 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 modify your fitness report for the reporting period 2 April 2015 to 1 June 2015.  The Board considered your contention that the period covered is 60 days (37 days in the office, 22 days in the reported billet), and that meaningful personal contact was not established during this time to allow for a proper observed evaluation.  You assert that the work hours and observation by your reporting senior (RS) and reviewing officer (RO) were reduced as your company change of command occurred part way through the period.  You also assert that the report is your first as a major, so no opportunity to perform at the new level of expectations was afforded.  Accordingly, you assert that you received middle tier markings over this short period that are disproportionately weighting the middle tier of your in-grade RS/RO master brief sheet picture. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO.  In this regard, the Board noted that the report period covered constituted 61 days, less than the 90-day threshold required for observed reports for a transfer occasion.  However, your RS sufficiently invoked exception to the established policy via Section I comment, especially when considering that your fitness report previous to the contested report (20140612 to 20150401) was a 10-month report written by the same RS for your performance in the same billet. 
 
The Board determined that your contention to remove “inappropriate comments” lacks merit, as the comments in question are not deemed derogatory or otherwise impertinent.  Your contention regarding “middle tier” markings also lacks merit, as per the Performance Evaluation System guidance, “[a] report is not considered unjust solely because the relative value and/or comparative assessment mark are rated lower than other reports.” 
 
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 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,