DEPARTMENT OF THE NAYY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL ROCORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
oSR
Docket No: NR776-14
26 June 2014
Dear Sergeant Ay
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 removing the Commanding Officer (CO) First
Endorsement 1300 Legal dated 2 August 2010, Subject: Relief for
Cause (RFC) from the Marine Security Guard (MSG) Program; the
service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry
dated 23 May 2011; and the CO Wounded Warrior Battalion - East
letter 1900 CO dated 21 September 2011, Subject: Notification
of Administrative Separation Processing from your Official
Military Personnel File (OMPF}. You also requested that your
additional military occupational specialty (MOS) 8156 (MSG) be
restored. Finally, you impliedly requested that your RFC from
the MSG Program be set aside, that the termination of your
special duty assignment (SDA) pay be set aside, and that the
draw case code “AO” (RFC from special duty) be removed from your
data in the Marine Corps Total Force System.
It is noted that Headquarters Marine Corps (HQOMC) has
administratively removed all three of the contested documents
from your OMPF.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 June 2014. 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 HQMC dated 1 April 2014 with enclosure, 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 probable material
error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion in
finding your RFC should not be set aside, so your 8156 MOS
should not be restored, and both the termination of your SDA pay
and the “AO” draw case code should stand. In this regard, the
Board particularly noted that the basis for the set aside of
your nonjudicial punishment of 29 July 2010 was not a
determination that you were innocent. In view of the above,
your application for relief beyond that effected by HOQMC 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,
Rec S Po
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5624 14
Pursuant to its regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. His transfer fitness report from RS Harrisburg, for 1 January to 13 July 2013 (copy at enclosure (1)), was fully favorable, even though the reporting senior, the Commanding Officer (CO), RS Harrisburg, requested Petitioner’s RFC on 12 April 2013, and the reviewing officer, the CO, First Marine Corps District, favorably endorsed the request on 26...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07838-10
JAMS stated that the NUP “stemmed from [Petitioner’s] failure to report a civilian DUI arrest,” however, the UPB entry actually says he was punished “for failing to notify his command of his DUI conviction [emphasis added] .” JAM5 noted that “the requirement to report the conviction (rather than the arrest) is lawful.” d. Enclosure (4) explains that PERB directed removing the contested fitness report in light of enclosure (3). e. In enclosure (5), the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02280 12
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 30 March 2009, a copy of which is at Tab A. That his record be corrected further to restore his AMOS of 8411. c. That his record be corrected further to show his entitlement to SDA pay for 21 July 2010 to 13 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02819-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing documentation of his relief for cause (RFC) from recruiting duty. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Grover, Ivins and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 1 July 2010, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06191-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 15 March to 14 August 2000, a copy of which is at enclosure (1). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04010-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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 | CY2011 | 06608-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 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 | CY2002 | 05473-00
(6), the M arine Corps Recruiting Command ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be MOS , and 2 In correspondence attached as enclosure (7), the HQMC Enlisted Assignment Branch (MI&A) has also commented to the effect that Petitioner ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be approved, but his requests concerning his RFC should be denied. Point of contact is M ecommended that the Board equest for removal of the VMC 118(11), page 11 .entry dated Acting Head, Field Support...
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 | CY2014 | NR1145 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board, requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing any and all derogatory material regarding the nonjudicial punishment (NUP) imposed on 31 July 2007 and the fitness report (FITREP) for the period from 16 December 2006 to 31 July 2007, which references the NUP, from both his official military personnel file (OMPF) and the Marine Corps Total Force System...