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 22 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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 20 December 2018 Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling entry and to remove all failures of selection.  The Board considered your contentions that you were issued the Page 11 in retribution for informing to your Battalion Commander grievances you had within the work environment.  You also assert that the Page 11 is not factual, objective, or an unbiased evaluation of your performance, that you were told by a defense attorney that it is a clear case of reprisal, and that the issuing officer was relieved of her duties and is pending court-martial. 
 
The Board acknowledged that you and your commanding officer (CO) did not have an ideal senior enlisted advisor/CO relationship based upon mutual trust and confidence.  The Board, however, noted that your CO was within her discretionary authority to issue the Page 11 entry.  The Board determined that the entry creates a permanent record of a matter your CO deemed significant enough to document, and your evidence did not show otherwise.  The Board also determined that the entry met 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 any assistance available, 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.  You were afforded the opportunity to rebut the counseling, and your 2 January 2019 rebuttal is filed in your official military personnel file with the Page 11 entry.  The Board thus concluded that the Page 11 entry does not constitute probable material error or injustice warranting its removal from your OMPF. 
 
The Board also noted that you did not submit any evidence to substantiate the Page 11 was issued in reprisal for protected communications.  Additionally, the Board noted that you did not provide any evidence that your CO was relieved and facing a court-martial, or how that related to the Page 11 that she issued to you.  The Board thus determined that there is no error in your OMPF, and that removal of any failures of selection are not warranted. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require that you 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,