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


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 10 August 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 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.   
 
You received an Administrative Remarks page 11 entry on 18 September 2020 for violating Articles 92 and 107 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for directing a subordinate to record a maintenance action as complete when you knew it was false.  You also received an adverse fitness report covering the period 1 July 2020 to 25 September 2020 due to receiving the page 11 and being relieved for cause.   
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove the page 11 entry, and if the Board removed the page 11, for the Board to remove the adverse fitness report.  You argue that the page 11 is invalid because the investigating officer did not contact you for a statement and the commanding officer based his determination on incomplete and inaccurate information. 
 
The Board noted that in your rebuttal statement to the page 11 you stated that you “take responsibility for my actions”.  The Board further noted that you did not submit a rebuttal statement to the adverse fitness report in which the Third Officer Sighter stated: “no factual differences exist as GySgt , the RS and the RO all agree to the facts as they were presented and are recorded.  GySgt  did falsify a maintenance action form (MAF) recording a 273 day inspection as complete when he knew that to not be true.  Additionally, GySgt  had another Marine junior to him in rank, sign off the MAF as the “worker”.  Consequently, the Board determined that the 18 September 2020 page 11 counseling entry is valid and concluded that the counseling and your adverse fitness report of 1 July 2020 to 25 September 2020 shall remain in your record.   
 
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, 
8/29/2021
Executive Director