Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04107-10
Original file (04107-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JSR
Docket No: 4107-10
26 August 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 promotion to master sergeant pursuant to your
selection by the Enlisted Remedial Selection Board for the
Fiscal Year 2007 Master Sergeant Selection Board. You also
impliedly requested changing your retired grade from gunnery
sergeant (pay grade E-7) to master sergeant (pay grade E-8) and
removing documentation of your administrative deletion from the
selection list. .

A three-member panel of the Board: for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 August 2010. 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 opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 17 June
2010 with reference (b) and 12 July 2010, and the undated
chronology, copies of which are attached, as well as your
counsel's letter dated 13 August 2010.

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 opinions.
The Board was unable to find your command took reprisal against
you for your inspector general or equal opportunity complaint,
your request mast or your correspondence with a Congressman. 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,

ly

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dil r

Enclosure

—_ to;

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09126-10

    Original file (09126-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested promotion to master gunnery sergeant (pay grade E-9}) from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 Reserve Master Gunnery Sergeant Selection 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, and the Board’s file on your prior case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09296-08

    Original file (09296-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 02199-10

    Original file (02199-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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 | CY2010 | 02203-10

    Original file (02203-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, and the Board's files on your prior cases (docket numbers 8653-01, 1685-06 and 10858- 08). The Board also considered your counsel's rebuttal letter dated 1 April 2010 with enclosures. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10843-09

    Original file (10843-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03855-08

    Original file (03855-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2008. The Board found no requirement for a page 11 entry, regarding your promotion revocation, in MCO P1400.32C, the applicable version of the Enlisted Promotions Manual (this requirement appears in paragraph 1204.5 of MCO P1400.32D, dated 11 May 2006). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01685-06

    Original file (01685-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the alternative, you now request new enlisted remedial selection boards (ERSB’s) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1999, 2000 and 2001 master sergeant and first sergeant selection boards.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. The Board found the ~Th’IPR-2 advisory opinion dated 2 August 2006 was correct as to the number of Marines with whom you were compared, despite the indications, in the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09717-10

    Original file (09717-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also impliedly requested, in the event of your promotion to master sergeant before the date of your transfer to the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, 30 September 2009, that your retired grade be changed from gunnery sergeant to master sergeant. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2011. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the: burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00883-10

    Original file (00883-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2014 | NR6179 14

    Original file (NR6179 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This request was denied on 30 September 2013. #, three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 January 2015. 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.