AL
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 8782-08
20 November 2008
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552. You requested, in effect,
remedial consideration for promotion from the Fiscal Year 2006
Marine Corps Reserve Staff Sergeant Selection Board.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 November 2008. 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, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 15 October
2008 with reference (c), a copy of which is attached, and your
letter of 4 November 2008 with enclosures.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
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 and
material evidence or other matter not previously 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,
W. DEAN PREF
Executive Ditxe
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
HARRY LEE HALL, 17 LEJEUNE ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5104 IN REPLY REFER TO:
1400/3
MMPR-2
OCT 15 2008
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
MEMORANDUM FOR THI
(
Subj: pee ELON IN e ]
Ref: (a) BCNR Docket Number 08782-08 of 25 Sep 08
(b) MCO P1400.32C, ENLPROMMAN
(c) SNM's TFDW Report of 14 Oct 08
1. Per reference (a) sil requests remedial consideration
to the rank of staff sergeant because he believes he was
erroneously considered in military occupational specialty (MOS)
1812 vice MOS 0641.
2. After reviewing request and the appropriate
selection board records, ait has been determined thatcgeenigaiiehitiy
was properly considered by the FY 2005 Reserve Staff Sexqeant
Selection Board in the occupational field (OccF1ld) of 1800. Per
paragragh 3100.3e of reference (b), reserve component Marines in
the Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) and Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR) will compete in the OccFld to which assigned on the
convening date of the selection board. Based on reference (c),
Ta pees cecord reflected a primary MOS of 1812 when the FY
2005 Reserve Staff Sergeant Selection Board convened on 11 January
2005. This would nake ggg 1 igible for promotion
consideration in the OccFld of 1800. Furthermore, all
applications for remedial consideration must be received no later
than three years after the date the contested board results were
made public.
3. Based on the foregoing and in accordance with reference (b),
is not eligible for remedial consideration by the FY
2005 Reserve Staff Sergeant Selection Board. It is recommended
that his record remain unchanged.
is REILLY
Major, U.S. Marine Corps
Head, Enlisted Promotion Section
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03326-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2, 12 October 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03192-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 7 June 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08315-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 18 September 2008, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7775 13
He was then selected by the FY 2012 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board, convened on 17 April 2012, and he was promoted to gunnery sergeant with a date of rank and effective date of 1 December 2012. d. Enclosure (4) shows that the in zone percentage selected for the FY 2006 Staff Sergeant Selection Board was 62.2. e. Enclosure (5) reflects that the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board directed removing Petitioner's fitness report for 1 April to 2 November 2006, which documented the later...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10418-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by changing the date of rank and effective date of his promotion to gunnery sergeant (pay grade E-7) from 1 July 1994 to 1 July 1993; and changing the date of rank and effective date of his promotion to master sergeant (pay grade E-8) from 1 April 2001 to 1 April 2000, to reflect...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10290-08
The front page of his fitness report for 18 March to 25 July 2008, a copy of which is at Tab B, verifies he had a first class PFT score of 205. d. In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps Enlisted Promotion Section commented to the effect Petitioner’s request should be denied, as he “chose not to take his PFT making him unqualified for extension or reenlistment.” e. Enclosure (3) is Petitioner’s reply to enclosure (2), detailing the circumstances that prevented him from taking...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10418-07
By enclosure (2), the Assistant General Counsel (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) directed that a new panel of the Board consider Petitioner’s case, and that the panel’s recommendation be forwarded to him for review and final disposition. d. In one of Petitioner’s prior cases, docket number 6843-05, the Board addressed his contention that when the FY 2005 Master Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board considered him, he had only two observed fitness reports since his restoration to active duty in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02503-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07636-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2008. The Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the HQMC memo 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 8 Sept 08, a copy of which is attached. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00413-09
Copies of the ‘PERB memorandum directing that action and the two removed reports are at enclosure (2). He was selected by the FY 2008 Staff Sergeant Selection Board, the first board to consider him without the contested fitness reports, and promoted with a date of rank and effective date of 1 October 2008. d. In the advisory opinions at enclosure (3), MMPR-2, the HOMC Enlisted Promotion Section, recommends that relief be denied, as Petitioner did not exercise due diligence, and even his...