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  18 February 2021.  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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in Navy Personnel Command letter 1610 PERS-32 of 17 January 2020; a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. 
 
A review of your record shows that you entered service with the Navy in 2016 as a Nurse Corps Officer.  You received a fitness report covering the period of 26 May 2018 through 28 February 2019 in which you received a 2.0 grade for teamwork and a “progressing” recommendation for promotion.  The comments section of the fitness report justified your 2.0 grade based on communication and conflict resolution issues while noting that you were counselled on multiple occasions for the need to improve your interpersonal skills.  On 31 July 2019, a fitness report letter supplement was issued by your reporting senior documenting your assertion that you did not sign block 32 of the fitness report in question.   
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that the fitness report in question should be removed since it contains a forgery of your signature in block 32.  You also allege that block 36 was blanks at the time you signed the fitness report.  Finally, you assert that you would have submitted a rebuttal to the fitness report had you known it would cause your non-selection for promotion.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in your case.  Specifically, the Board concluded that there was no error with the fitness report in question since the comments section of the report substantiate that you were counselled on multiple occasions during the reporting period.  That fact, when combined with the performance deficiencies in the also documented comment section, supports the 2.0 grade assigned for teamwork and your progressing promotion recommendation.  Therefore, the Board determined that your allegation of forgery of your signature in block 32 did not change the accuracy of the fitness report in describing your performance or whether you received counselling.  Regarding your assertion that you failed to submit a rebuttal letter to the report since you were unaware of the report’s impact on your promotion board, the Board did not find that argument persuasive for removing the report.  As explained previously, the Board found the fitness report to be substantively accurate since it properly reflects your performance and counselling during the reporting period.  The fact you were unaware of its impact on your selection for promotion was determined to be irrelevant since your subjective awareness of its impact has no bearing on whether the report was accurate.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
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,