DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2896-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10, United States Code, section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 5 February 2019. 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, the 
enclosed 3 July 2018 and 17 July 2018 advisory opinions from the Navy Personnel Command 
(NPC) (PERS-3C) and NPC (PERS-8S), respectively, as well as your rebuttal of 18 September 
2018, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

The Board carefully considered your request to modify your fitness report for the reporting 
period from 1 February 2016 to 31 January 2017 and to remove your Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 O4 
Promotion Selection Board failure of selection (FOS). The Board considered your statement and 
your contentions that the fitness report shows a drop in performance in blocks 36 and 37 from 
the previous period and constitutes a decline in performance as outlined in BUPERSINST 
1610.10D, that your Reporting Senior (RS) failed to provide comments to justify the decline in 
performance, and that the fitness report was the most recent report going into the promotion 
board, which resulted in your FOS. In your rebuttal, you contend that a decline from 5.0 to 3.0 
would be considered adverse. 

The Board noted that the contested report does show a decline in performance in blocks 36 and 
37. The Board also noted that the Navy Performance Evaluation System Manual provides that a 
decline in performance is defined as receiving lower grades on two or more performance traits in 
the same paygrade by the same RS. If the decline was due to forced distribution limits, the RS is 
to explain the decline as such. The Board concurred with the AO furnished by PERS-3C and 
determined that, although your RS did not directly address the two declining traits, the RS’s 
statement “Equal in all respects to my Must Promote, only a Promote due to timing and forced 
distribution” was a sufficient explanation. 

Regarding the adverse nature of the report, the Board noted that paragraph 3 of the Navy 
Performance Evaluation System Manual provides that “the trait grade must be below 3.0 or more 
than two trait grades of 2.0 to render a report adverse.” Accordingly, the Board determined that 
the decline in trait grades on your report were not below 3.0 and therefore, are not adverse. The 
Board determined, too, that your RS’s comment on force distribution was sufficient, and that a 
drop in traits from 5.0 to 3.0 did not render the report adverse. The Board thus concluded that 
you did not demonstrate probable material error or injustice warranting the fitness report’s 
removal or modification. Moreover, based on the decision of the Board not to remove the fitness 
report, there is no justification to remove your FOS incurred by the FY18 Promotion Selection 
Board. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new matters. 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, 

5/31/2019