Docket No: 6913-20 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:   Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO  ,  XXX XX USMC 
 
Ref:  (a) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1552 
     
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments  
  (2) NAVMC 118(11) Administrative Remarks 6105 of 1 Jul 14 
  (3)  email of 19 Aug 14 
  (4) HQMC memo 1070 Sect of 9 Nov 20  
      
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of the reference, Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing his 1 July 2014 Administrative Remarks (page 11) 6105 counseling entry. 
 
2.  The Board, consisting of Mr. , Mr. and Ms.  reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 July 2021 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.   
 
3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, found that, before applying to this Board, he exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.  The Board made the following findings: 
 
     a.  On 1 July 2014, Petitioner was issued enclosure (2), a 6105 page 11 entry counseling him for failing to properly secure blank ammunition, resulting in the potential for loss or pilferage of Arms, Ammunition and Explosive (AA&E) materials. 
 
     b.  On 19 August 2014, Petitioner received an email notifying him to indicate his election ‘to’ or ‘not to’ make a statement by circling an option.  Enclosure (3). 
 
     c.  Petitioner contends that his contested page 11 entry is missing the statement regarding his decision to make a rebuttal, the date of the entry is incorrect, and his alleged infraction was not a violation of the regulation referenced in the counseling.  
  
      d.  The advisory opinion (AO) recommended that Petitioner’s request be denied.  The AO determined that Petitioner’s page 11 entry was written according to the Marine Corps Individual Records and Administration Manual (IRAM) and contained the proper elements of a 6105 counseling entry.  The AO noted that Petitioner’s page 11 entry did contain the required statement providing him the opportunity to submit a statement, the fact that Petitioner did not make an election is not evidence that he was not afforded the opportunity.  The AO also noted that the Marine Corps Physical Security Program Manual provides guidance on the movement of AA&E and does not distinguish between live and blank ammunition.  The AO also recommended that Petitioner be granted the opportunity to submit a statement to the record.   Enclosure (4). 
 
CONCLUSION 
  
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting partial corrective action.  In this regard, the Board, substantially concurred with that AO that Petitioner’s contested page 11 entry was written and issued according to the IRAM.  In this regard, the Board noted that according to the IRAM, Petitioner was properly counseled for failing to properly secure blank ammunition and determined that the entry provided written notification concerning his deficiencies, specific recommendations for corrective action, where to seek assistance, the consequences for failure to take corrective action, and it afforded Petitioner the opportunity to submit a rebuttal.  Moreover, his commanding officer (CO) signed the entry and determined that his substandard performance was a matter essential to record, as it was his/her right to do.  The Board also determined that, even if the counseling did not occur on the date of the entry, based upon the distributed nature of Petitioner’s former command, the date constitutes a harmless error that would not impact the underlying performance related basis for his page 11 entry.  Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting the removal of his contested page 11 entry.  The Board, however, determined that Petitioner should have the opportunity to submit a rebuttal statement to the record. 
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. 
 
Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by accepting his submission of a rebuttal statement regarding his 1 July 2014 Administrative Remarks page 11 entry. 
 
4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 
 
5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing  corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.   

8/8/2021  
Executive Director