DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No: l032-16 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2017. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) provided by Navy Personnel Command (PERS-32) dated 23 March 2017. 

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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You were issued a Regular/Periodic Evaluation Report and Counseling Record ("Eval") for the reporting period 16 November 2014 to 15 November 2015. In response to the Eva!, you submitted a statement for the record and addressed your declining trait average. Your reporting senior (RS) subsequently submitted an Evaluation Report Letter-Supplement, upgrading Blocks 33 and 40 of the Eval and providing an additional comment in Block 43. The Board considered your desire to have the contested Eval removed from your record. The Board considered your argument that the Eval shows a decline in trait average and promotion recommendation, and that Navy regulations require justification ifthere is a decline in performance, but no justification 
was provided. You also assert tliac ~'OU were never counseled. 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. In 
this regard, the Board significantly concurred with the comments and recommendation in the 
AO, and that your RS already addressed your complaint in the Eva! Letter-Supplement. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

lt is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again. 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 the absence of sufficient new and material evidence 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 cow1 of appropriate jurisdiction. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director