DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 10729-08
19#March 2010
*
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 that your transfer to the Fleet Mariye Corps
Reserve (FMCR) effective 1 July 2008 be set aside and that you
be afforded remedial consideration for promotion for the Fiscal
Year (FY) 2009 Master Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board. Your
request to set aside your transfer was denied in your previous
case, docket number 10418-07, by the Assistant General Counsel
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs) on 29 July 2008.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 18 March 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed ingaccordance 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 previous
case, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies. The Board also considered the advisory opinion
from Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC), dated 10 December 2008,
a copy of which is attached. Finally, the Board considered
your rebuttal letter dated 24 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. In this connection, the Board found that
you offered nothing new and material regarding your transfer to
the FMCR except your contention, in paragraph 5 of your letter
dated 24 June 2009, that you submitted a request, never
received by the HOMC. Separation and Retirement Branch, to be
extended on active duty from 1 July 2008 to 1 January 2009 with
an associated request to be considered by the FY 2009 Master
Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board. Because you provided no copy
of your request, the Board was unable to find that it was, in
fact, submitted or that its content was as you state. Further,
‘the Board felt that if you had gotten no response to a request
of such importance to your career, you should have followed up
on it,
Since the Board found insufficient basis to conclude you should
have been considered by the FY 2009 Master Gunnery Sergeant
Selection Board, it had no basis to recommend you be afforded
remedial consideration for that promotion board.
In view of the above, 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,
Wen SDD
W. DEAN PF Ei
Executive Ditekyo
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03147-11
Petitioner further requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 19 March 2008, a copy of which is at Tab F. Finally, he requested setting aside the Commandant Of the Marine Corps (CMC)'s revocation dated 8 July 2008 of his selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 First Sergeant Selection Board and promoting him to first sergeant with the lineal precedence he would have had, but for the revocation. The PERB report at enclosure (2) stated that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05700-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 00883-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 10584-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. In this connection, the Board particularly noted that you were not selected when you received remedial consideration for promotion from the FY 2005 and 2006 Master Sergeant Selection Boards; and the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion dated 29 April 2008, except to note you actually had only one observed gunnery sergeant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03999-10
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 removing the fitness report for 8 December 2007 to 8 August 2008, a copy of which is at Tab A. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing all remaining references to his NJP of 7 August 2008, to include the following: {1) Unit Punishment Book entry (2) Second sentence,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11168-10
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 4974-10), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, the Board particularly noted the figures provided in paragraph 3 of the advisory opinion, as well as the uncontested derogatory service record page 11 entries dated 14 November 1993 and 21 March, 24 March and 15 November...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09296-08
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 00698-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 May 2004. 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. Per reference (a), Gunnery Sergeant requests promotion to the rank of master sergeant.2.
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...