DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No. 09296-08
11 June 2009
This is in reference to your application requesting correction
of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of
the United States Code, section 1552.
You expressly requested adjusting your master sergeant (pay
grade E-8) date of rank and effective date to reflect selection
by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 Master Sergeant Selection Board,
vather than the enlisted remedial selection board for the FY
2008 Master Sergeant Selection Board. You also impliedly
requested reconsideration of your previous request to adjust
your gunnery sergeant (pay grade E-7) date of rank and effective
date to reflect selection by the Calendar Year (CY) 2001 or 2002
Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board, rather than CY 2003. In your
previous case, docket number 5997-07, this request was denied on
6 March 2008. .
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on
11 June 2009. 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, the Board's file on your prior case, your naval record
and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition,
the Board considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters
Marine Corps dated 13 February 2009, a copy of which is
attached, and your letter dated 10 June 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.
The Board still was unable to find your selection by the CY 2001
or 2002 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Boards would have been
probable, had your record not included the weight control entry
for 9 August 1993 to 31 August 1995 the Board directed removing
in your prior case, again noting that a more recent contested
‘weight control entry for 31 December 1999 to 28 February 2000
would have been in your record in any event. The Board further
noted that the CY 2003 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board selected
you with an uncorrected record. While the Board did consider
your having been selected for promotion to master sergeant the
first time you were considered with a corrected record to be new
and material evidence in support of backdating your promotion to
gunnery sergeant, such that reconsideration was warranted, this
new evidence did not persuade the Board that a corrected record
would have made it probable that you would have been selected
earlier for gunnery sergeant. Consequently, the Board again
voted to deny relief regarding backdating of your promotion to
gunnery sergeant.
Since the Board denied your implied request to backdate your
promotion to gunnery sergeant, it had no grounds to backdate
your promotion to master sergeant.
In view of the above, the Board voted to deny both your express
and implied requests. 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,
5s, Sh. a0
W. DEAN PFRELP
Executive Dir
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07373-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior case (docket number 3061-04), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06748-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior case (docket number 2803-07), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03401-02
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 LCC: ddj Docket No: 3401-02 10 September 2002 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. 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...
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 | 12242-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. 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. 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04049-09
Your previous case, docket number 08315-08, was denied on 14 October 2008. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 17 December 2009. 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 07166-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of the contested fitness report for 1 January to 2 February 1996. The Board also considered your rebuttal letter dated 30 July 2002 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 concluding that no further correction to your fitness report record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10843-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in> support thereof, the Board's file on your prior case (docket number 9230-08}, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in...