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.    
 
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 case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2021.  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 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  The Board also considered the 4 May 2020 advisory opinions (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 15 March 2014 to 30 May 2014 Fitness Report.  The Board considered your contention that it was unjust for your Reporting Senior (RS) to issue an observed report of less than 90 days and compare you with others that he observed for a full year.  You assert that your RS agrees that he made a mistake in writing an observed report and that it unjustly impacts your record and ability to serve in the Marine Corps.  You also contend that your Reviewing Officer (RO) failed to make a comment authorizing your RS to write a fitness report on an officer in the same grade. 
 
The Board, however, substantially concurred with the AO and the PERB’s finding that the report is valid as written and filed in accordance with the applicable Performance Evaluation System (PES) Manual.  Specifically, your RS’s Directed Comment in Section I fully complied with established policy at processing, and his comments appear to be full-informed and do not betray 
any suggestion that your RS did not have sufficient observation of you during the reporting period.  Moreover, your RO concurred with the evaluation.  The Board also noted that your RS was the Commanding Officer, senior in billet to you and thus, no Section K authorization was required.  
 
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, 
 
4/25/2021
Executive Director