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 22 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 17 April 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 remove your 15 October 2017 to 31 January 2018 Fitness Report.  The Board considered your contention that a civilian court judge decided that accusations made against you were unfounded, and he dismissed your case.  You argue that the decision to make the contested fitness report adverse was decided prior to you being found innocent of all charges on 17 November 2017.   
 
The Board, however, concurred with the PERB’s decision that you did not demonstrate probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting removal of the fitness report.  The Board noted that, on 14 October 2017, you were arrested for disorderly conduct and injury to personal property--an interior dome light in a city police vehicle by pulling the light out of the roof.  The Board also noted that, contrary to your assertion, the civilian judge did not find you “innocent of all charges.”  Instead, on 17 November 2017, you plead “no contest” to both charges, were ordered to pay $128.71 in restitution, and then the judge dismissed your case.   
 
The Board determined that the dismissal of the civilian charges does not invalidate the predicate of the report’s adversity.  Although the Administrative Remarks (Page 11) counseling mentioned in the report could not be found in your official military personnel file, the Board noted that your command provided sufficient justification in the report to justify its adversity, such as you being removed from your leadership billet as a Platoon Commander. 
 
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, 

4/28/2021
Executive Director