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

Docket No: 213-16 

JUL 5 2016 

From: Chairman, Board for Correction ofNaval Records 
To: Secretary of the Navy 

Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF 

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552 

Encl: (I) DD Form 149withattachments 
(2) Case Summary with attachments 
(3) NPC ltr 1610 PERS-32 dtd 9 Mar 16 

1. Pursuant to the provisions ofreference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member ofthe Navy 
Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her naval record be corrected by 
removing her evaluation report covering the period from 16 September 2014 to 15 September 
2014 from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). Enclosures (1) through (3) apply. 

2. The Board, consisting of , and , reviewed Petitioner's 
allegations oferror and injustice on 17 May 2016 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that 
the partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence ofrecord. 
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofthe enclosures, naval records, and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered enclosure (3) an 
advisory opinion provided by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) PERS-32. 

3. The.Board, having reviewed all the facts ofrecord pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of 
error and injustice finds as follows: 

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available 
under existing law and regulations within the Department ofthe Navy. 

b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner. 

c. Petitioner states, in part, that the report ending 15 September 2015, has false comments, 
unjustified trait marks, and that the promotion recommendation should be removed. She feels 
that her drop from "Early Promote" two years ago, a "Must Promote" last year, and current 
"Promotable" with an unjust 2.0 marking in "Active Communication" shows a steady decrease in 
her performance, and the drop does not accurately reflect her performance. 

d. Enclosure (3) states, in part, that Navy directives require the Reporting Senior (RS) to 
submit fitness reports on a scheduled periodic date. The RS has to substantiate three or more 2.0 
performance trait marks with comments. Petitioner received a 2.0 trait graded in block 38 with a 
second comment in block 41 that may be perceived as a weakness. However, the RS submitted a 
letter-supplement revising the report changing her trait mark in block 38 to 3.0 and redacted the 
second comment in block 41. Petitioner's promotion recommendation change due to forced 
distribution is not looked at as a decline in performance. Navy directives state that ifa decline 
was due to forced distribution limits, it would have to be explained as such. The RS assigned a 
"Promotable" recommendation, which is not adverse and complies with force distribution limits. 
The comments and performance trait marks assigned are at the discretion ofthe RS. The report 
is valid and Petitioner does not prove the report to be unjust or in error. It is recommended that 
Petitioner record remain unchanged. 

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration ofall the evidence of record, the Board concurs with the 
enclosure (3) that Petitioner's evaluation report covering the period from 16 September 2014 to 
15 September 2015, remain a part ofher OMPF. However, the Board notes that Petitioner's still 
has a 3.14 trait average on her evaluation report ending 15 September 2015. With the change 
made to block 38 ofthe report to 3.0, it should read 3.29. 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the 
following partial corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing the "Member Trait Average" to 
3.29. 

b. That no further relief be granted. 

c. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board's recommendation 
be corrected, removed, or completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries 
or material be added to the record in the future. 

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) ofthe revised Procedures ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval 
Records (32 Code ofFederal Regulations, Section 723.6( c), it is certified that a quorum was 
present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete 
record ofthe Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter. 

5. Pursuant to the delegation ofauthority set out in Section 6(e) ofthe revised Procedures of 
the Board for Correction ofNaval Records (32 Code ofFederal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) 
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing 
corrective action, taken under the authority ofreference (a), has been approved by the Board on 
behalf ofthe Secretary ofthe Navy. 


Executive Director