DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 4160-11
22 September 2011
e
Dear Mr. ld
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 2008 Reserve Staff Sergeant Selection Board
or correction of your record to show you were promoted pursuant
to selection by that promotion board.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 22 September 2011. 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 31 May
2011 with reference (b) and 13 July 2011, copies of which are
attached.
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
in finding you should not receive remedial consideration for
promotion. The Board was unable to find you would have been
selected for promotion had you been considered, as you should
have been, in military occupational specialty 0200
(intelligence) instead of 0100 (administration). In view of the
above, your application has been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel wiil 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 PF
Executive Di r
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04892-10
You requested special selection board (SSB) consideration for the Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 through 2001 Marine Corps Reserve (Active Reserve) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards or, in the alternative, promotion to lieutenant colonel with the date of rank and effective date you would have been assigned, had you been promoted pursuant to selection by the FY 1997 promotion board. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your h...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06750-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 20 September, 29 October and 29 December 2010, copies of which are 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 | CY2010 | 09126-10
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 | CY2010 | 08545-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2011. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05367-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 June 2010 with e-mail dated 16 June 2010 and 27 and 29 September 2010, copies of which are attached. 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 | 05385-10
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, 10858-08 and 2203-10). By order of 31 March 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia again remanded your case to this Board to address expressly three issues your counsel raised: (1)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08895-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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 material error or...
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 | 09717-10
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 | CY2013 | NR8499 13
You requested removing the fitness report for 14 February to 10 June 2011 and your two rebuttals, each dated 8 June 2011, to the service record page 11 ("Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated 25 May and 1 June 2011, respectively. Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. Since the Board found insufficient grounds to remove either of your failures of selection for promotion, it had...