Docket No 2836-20   
  

 
Dear :  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.    
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your applications on 10 June 2021.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  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 applications, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, as well as the undated Advisory Opinion (AO) provided by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-45), which was provided to you on 17 November 2019.   
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to change the characterization of the suspension of your joint duty assignment to “compassionate reassignment” based on the evidence of hardship, and to award 16 months of joint duty credit to your Joint Qualification record, for the period 12 March 2015 to 29 July 2016.  The Board considered your contention that your fitness report for the reporting period 1 November 2015 to 29 July 2016 was removed from your record and that there is a lack of strict proof for the suspension of your joint tour.  The Board also considered your assertion of strict proof of your  health and tragic loss, and the hardship you endured during that time.     
 
The Board noted that an officer begins to accrue joint duty credit upon assignment in a Joint Duty Assignment List (JDAL) position and stops accruing joint duty credit on departure from the JDAL position.  Officers in grade O-6 and below must complete a full three-year tour unless they qualify for early release using a tour length exclusion, or have an approved tour length waiver.  Additionally, officers may be released from Staff Joint Duty Assignments (S-JDA) before completing a full three year tour without a tour length waiver if the officers is reassigned from an S-JDA for unusual personal reasons (including extreme hardship and medical conditions) beyond the control of the officer or the Military Department.  
 
The Board also noted that the Director, Joint Staff, acting for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, may suspend an officer assigned to the Joint Staff for poor performance, professional inadequacy, acts of misconduct, suspension of security access, or other activities incompatible with continued service on the Joint Staff and return the officer to the control of the parent Service at any time.  Officers will not receive joint duty credit, regardless of time served or experienced gained, if suspended from the Joint Staff.  
 
In your case, the Board noted that on 10 May 2016, the Commander, United States Military Observer Group (USMOG) requested your Detachment for Cause (DFC).  However, the DFC request was ultimately changed to a request for return to service without prejudice.  On 27 June 2016, the Director of Operations, Readiness and Mobilization, USMOG-W submitted the request and noted he found no justification for any adverse or administrative action against you, but that it is in your best interest to return to service for reassignment.   
 
The Board determined that there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, indicating that you or the Navy requested your early release from your S-JDA assignment for unusual personal reasons (including extreme hardship and medical conditions) that were beyond your control.  The Board, however, determined that you were returned to service at the request of your Commander, following several documented incidents in which you were argumentative, dismissive, and insubordinate with your leadership, and after you were counseled regarding a number of incidents of poor performance.  In consideration of your personal issues at the time, the Director of Operations, Readiness and Mobilization, USMOG-W found no justification for any adverse or administrative action against you, although suspension from duty is considered an adverse action.   
 
With regard to your contention that your fitness report for the reporting period 1 November 2015 to 29 July 2016 was expunged, and therefore there is a lack of strict proof that your S-JDA tour was suspended, the Board determined this contention is without merit.  In this regard, the Board noted that you were in a summary group of one and received a decline in six trait grades from your preceding report by the same Reporting Senior (RS), and that your RS did not include the required explanatory comments in block 41 for a declining report, as required by the Evaluation Manual guidance.  The Board noted that the report was removed from your record due to procedural errors and that removal of the report does not invalidate or change the characterization of your suspended S-JDA tour.  In view of the foregoing, the Board concluded that the requested relief is not warranted. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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, 
6/29/2021
Executive Director