DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 
Docket No: 10124-18 



Dear 
This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request. You previously petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter dated 4 May 2017 that your application was disapproved. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board for Correction of Naval Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). After careful and conscientious consideration of your new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board, the Board found the evidence was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has again been denied. 

In your previous petition to the Board (Docket #2331-16), you requested removal of the 
originally submitted fitness report for the reporting period 1 February 2013 to 19 July 2013 
(“contested FITREP”) and the supplemental fitness report letter dated 4 June 2014, and for your performance summary report (PSR) to reflect this change. Your current application included an additional request to remove your failure of selection incurred by the FY -19 Active Duty O4 Staff Promotion Selection Board. Your application has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session 30 April 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application and any material submitted in support of your application, and the enclosed advisory opinion (AO) furnished by Navy Personnel Command (PERS-32) for your previously considered case. 

Your new evidence included an advocacy letter from your then-Reporting Senior (RS) for the 
contested FITREP an advocacy letter from the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) appellate authority 
who set aside your NJP imposed on 8 July 2013. Both advocates opined, in part, that the intent 
of their respective corrective action was that any reference to your NJP be removed from your 
official military personnel file (OMPF). Both advocates strongly believe that continued 
inclusion of the contested fitness report and supplemental cover letter would result in material error and injustice. Specifically, the contested documents are unfairly impacting your career progression and unjustly detract from your service record. You contended that continued inclusion of the fitness report and supplemental letter is fundamentally unfair, and that the supplemental fitness report was submitted as a more accurate reflection of the period covered. You argued that the supplemental fitness report for the same reporting period was intended to replace the first fitness report, rather than supplement. Additionally, you assert that the intention of both the Reporting Senior and NJP set-aside authority was that the original report would be removed from your record. 

The Board significantly concurred with the AO that there is no error because inclusion of both 
the contested FITREP and the supplemental fitness report complies with Navy policy in that 
supplemental material does not replace the original fitness report, nor does it change the 
information on your PSR. The Board also determined that continued inclusion of the contested 
documents in your OMPF is not an injustice because the supplemental cover letter fully explains the circumstances leading to the new fitness report. The Board determined that, with no change made to your OMPF, removal of your FY-19 failure of selection is not warranted. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously 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, 

5/3/2019