From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:   Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF   
 
Ref:  (a) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1552 
  (b) BUPERSINST 1610.10D 
  (c) CNO  291827Z Jun 17 (NAVADMIN 157/17)   
 (d) SECNAVINST 1920.6C 
 (e) Title 10 U.S.C. § 628 
 (f) SECNAVINST 1402.1 
  (g) ASN (M&RA) memo of 28 Nov 17 “Delegation of Authority to the Board for 
      Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to Direct the Convening of a Special Selection 
  Board (SSB), Supplemental All-Fully-Qualified Officers List (AFQOL), and Special 
 AFQOL”  
    
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments  
   (2) Fitness Report and Counseling Record for the reporting period 25 Oct 17 to 31 Jan 18 
   (3) Fitness Report and Counseling Record for the reporting period 1 Feb 18 to 31 Jan 19 
 (4) NPC ltr 1610 PERS-32 of 12 Dec 19 
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a commissioned officer of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his record be corrected by removing his fitness reports for the reporting periods  25 October 2017 to 31 January 2018 and 1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019, and replacing them with corrected versions.  Petitioner also requested the convening of a Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Special Selection Board (SSB).  
 
2.  The Board, consisting of  reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 19 November 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.   
 
3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, found as follows: 
 
      a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy. 

    b.  Petitioner was issued enclosures (2) and (3), two fitness reports covering the period from 25 October 2017 to 31 January 2019.  Petitioner signed both reports and indicated in Block 46 (Signature of Individual evaluated) “I do not intend to submit a statement.”  Petitioner contends that the reports were not written in compliance with reference (b), and that improper summary groups on each report disadvantaged him when he was eligible for, but failed selection for promotion.  Petitioner argues that the summary groups include officers who have different competitive group designators (6160, 6360), and that reference (c), NAVADMIN 157/17 implemented changes to reference (b), requiring a separate grouping for each designator.  Petitioner submitted e-mail correspondence from his reporting senior (RS) that mistakenly assured Petitioner that he was correctly “grouped” with other officers on the contested fitness reports’ summary group.  Petitioner also furnished evidence that, in September 2019, the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-32) had rejected a third fitness report issued to the Petitioner by the same RS “due to the original being rejected . . . based on an incorrect summary group competitive category.” 
 
     c. Reference (b), Evaluation Manual, provides guidance on grouping Limited Duty Officers.  Reference (c), NAVADMIN 157/17, implemented changes to reference (b) for fitness reports ending 1 October 2017 or later, requiring a separate grouping for active duty Limited Duty Officers in designators (61XX/62XX/63XX/64XX). 
 
     d.  Petitioner failed selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Navy Active-Duty Restricted Line Lieutenant Commander Promotion Selection Board and incurred his second failure of selection by the FY 2020 Navy Active-Duty Restricted Line Lieutenant Commander Promotion Selection Board.  Accordingly, Petitioner was involuntarily retired on 29 February 2020, pursuant to reference (d).  
 
    e.  Enclosure (4), the advisory opinion (AO), furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-32) recommended that Petitioner’s request to remove and replace his fitness reports be approved.  The AO noted that both contested fitness reports are in violation of references (b) and (c) for invalid summary grouping and are technically invalid.  PERS-32 recommended that the reports be removed and replaced with memorandums or corrected fitness reports submitted by the original reporting senior. 
 
 f.  Pursuant to references (e), (f), and (g), granting a SSB is an action to consider for promotion, in or above the promotion zone, those eligible Navy and Marine Corps commissioned officers, including former officers no longer on the ADL [Active Duty List] or RASL [Reserve Active Status List], who were not considered by a promotion selection board due to administrative error or who were unfairly considered and not selected for promotion.    
 
 g.  References (e) and (f) prescribe the rules and procedures for the convening and conduct of SSBs.  Per reference (f), each officer is responsible for his or her individual record.  An officer is required to review his or her service record at least annually.  An officer must maintain reasonably careful records to ensure his or her record is accurate at the time an SSB convenes or at the time a promotion process is held.  Absent extenuating circumstances, an officer’s maintenance of reasonably careful records should ensure any error is corrected before any board or process commences.  Moreover, officers are required to correct deficiencies in their records as soon as possible.   
 
 h.  Reference (g) delegated authority to the BCNR to direct the Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP) to convene a SSB, providing that the BCNR fully complies with the requirements and restrictions set forth in references (e) and (f). 
 
CONCLUSION 
  
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error warranting corrective action.  The Board substantially concurred with the AO that the two contested fitness reports are in error and are invalid.  In this regard, the Board noted that the reports’ RS mistakenly submitted the reports without implementing the change in policy guidance provided in reference (c).  Additionally, the two reports were accepted by PERS-32, entered into Petitioner’s official military personnel file, and were available for review when he failed selection by the FY 2019 and FY 2020 promotion selection boards when he failed to select.    
 
The Board thus concluded that the RS for the contested fitness reports at enclosures (2) and (3) shall submit corrected fitness reports for the same reporting periods, to reflect the correct summary group for each report, and that the invalid reports shall be removed and replaced with the corrected fitness reports. 
 
Additionally, the Board determined that, due to the error in Petitioner’s record at the time he failed selection by the FY 2019 and FY 2020 promotion selection boards, he was unfairly considered and not selected for promotion.  The Board also noted that Petitioner and his RS were apparently unaware of the policy change regarding summary groups at the time the two reports were submitted, and that it was only when a third fitness report was rejected by PERS-32 did the Petitioner realize the error on his two preceding fitness reports.  The Board also noted that, once the error was identified, Petitioner submitted enclosure (1) with supporting evidence to the Board.  The Board thus concluded that Petitioner exercised reasonable diligence in correcting his record, and that a FY 2019 Navy Active-Duty Restricted Line Lieutenant Commander SSB is warranted. 
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. 
 
Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing enclosure (2), his Fitness Report and Counseling Record for the reporting period 25 October 2017 to 31 January 2018 and replacing it with a corrected version that shall be submitted by the report’s RS. 
 
Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing enclosure (2), his Fitness Report and Counseling Record for the reporting period 1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019 and replacing it with a corrected version that shall be submitted by the report’s RS. 

Convene a FY 2019 Navy Active-Duty Restricted Line Lieutenant Commander SSB to consider Petitioner for promotion to lieutenant commander. 
  
4.  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 of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 
 
5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.