DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
              
Docket No: 8337-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear: 
 
This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
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 issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.       
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 11 July 2018 Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling entry.  The Board considered your contention that you received the counseling during a fitness report reporting period for alleged issues that occurred during the previous reporting period.  You contend that the previous reporting period reflected greatly reduced evaluation grades, and that the counseling entry involves an incident that occurred during the previous fitness report reporting period but resulted in derogatory material for the current reporting period, resulting in two years of fitness reports that are negatively impacted for alleged issues during just one annual reporting period.  You also argue that the contested Page 11 entry was issued by a commanding officer (CO) who was not part of your unit during the time of the alleged incident, but who issued the counseling only after he was approached by your reporting senior.  You also assert that the Page 11 entry was submitted for inclusion in your official military personnel file (OMPF) by your command, without your rebuttal, before the rebuttal deadline had expired, displaying your command’s apathy and potentially hindering your reenlistment. 
     
The Board, however, determined that the entry satisfied the 6105 counseling requirements detailed in MCO 1900.16 (MARCORSEPMAN).  Specifically, the Board noted that the entry provided written notification concerning your deficiencies, specific recommendations for corrective action indicating available assistance, a comprehensive explanation of the consequences of failure to successfully take the recommended corrective action, and a reasonable opportunity to undertake the recommended corrective action.  The counseling also noted that you had been informally and formally counseled in the past regarding outbursts and unprofessional behavior.  You acknowledged the counseling the date it was issued, but you failed to choose whether you did or did not intend to submit a written rebuttal.   
 
The Board determined that your contentions are without merit.  In this regard, the Board noted that the Page 11 entry is not reflected in any of your fitness reports as derogatory material, and that the fitness report for the reporting period in which you were issued the Page 11 entry improved substantially from the preceding reporting period when some of your outbursts and unprofessional behavior occurred, as documented in the entry.  The Board determined that you were appropriately counseled by your CO after failing to correct deficiencies that you were previously counseled for.  The Board also determined that your command was not “apathetic” in submitting your rebuttal statement for inclusion in your OMPF.  The Board noted that, although you were advised that you could submit a rebuttal within five working days after acknowledging the entry, you failed to indicate in the entry whether you did or did not intend to submit a statement, and when you did submit your rebuttal, it was dated 24 July 2018, well after the rebuttal deadline.  The Board also noted that your 24 July 2018 rebuttal statement is in your OMPF, and that you were able to reenlist on 11 January 2019.  The Board thus concluded that the Page 11 entry does not constitute probable material error or injustice warranting its removal from your OMPF. 
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  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,