Docket No: 3416-20 
Ref: Signature Date 
 

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 application on 13 April 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 application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, and the 1 June 2020 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Headquarters Marine Corps Secretariat Branch. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 21 August 2019, Administrative Remarks (page 11) 6105 counseling entry and rebuttal statement.  The Board considered your contention that you received your page 11 entry from an officer who was an action officer.  You claim that according to the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN) a 6105 must be issued by the commanding officer (CO). 
 
The Board, however, determined that your page 11 entry is valid.  In this regard, the Board noted that pursuant to the MARCORSEPMAN, you were properly counseled concerning your incident of assault.  The Board also noted that according to the Marine Corps Individual Records Administration Manual (IRAM) you were properly counseled and also determined that the contested entry was written and issued according to the IRAM.  Specifically, the entry provided written notification concerning your deficiencies, specific recommendations for corrective action, where to seek assistance, the consequences for failure to complete your enlistment and to take corrective action, and it afforded you the opportunity to submit a rebuttal.  The Board found no evidence, other than your statement, that your page 11 was not issued by your CO.  The Board determined that the AO was based solely on your statement and failed to include any substantive evidence to support the recommendation, thereby rendering the opinion invalid.  Moreover, the Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official action of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties and you did not provide evidence to overcome this presumption.  Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting corrective action. 
 
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,