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

Docket No: 8170-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear

This letter is in reference to your latest reconsideration request.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised in our letter dated 2 February 2018 that your application was disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of Army, 335 F. Supp 2d 48 (D.D.C.2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of your new matters, the Board found the evidence was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has again been denied.
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.
 
Your application has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session on 17 December 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 the matters submitted in support of your application.  The Board also considered the enclosed 31 May 2017 advisory opinion (AO) previously furnished by the Headquarters, Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), as well as your 26 June 2017 rebuttal.
  
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 June 2015 to 17 June 2016. The Board considered your contention that the report is marked adverse and states that “[you] refused to take responsibility for the failed programs that were assigned to [you].” You assert that there were no failed programs under your purview, and your new evidence included inspection reports for the period in question. 

The Board noted that, as the Maintenance Officer, you were responsible for the Maintenance Program, with duties that included supervising and coordinating “the installation, operation, and maintenance of all aviation command and control systems.”  The Board determined, however, that you were not relieved due to failed inspections, but in part, “due to theloss of all trust and confidence” of your chain of command after inspection results revealed your poor performance as the Maintenance Officer, and an unreliable and neglected Maintenance Program.  The Board thus concluded that there is no probable material error or injustice warranting removal of the contested report.
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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,