DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 MGYSGT USMC (RET) Dear Master Gunnery Sergeant : 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 19 August 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. On 23 October 2020, the Board requested additional medical or clinical evidence from you in support of your claim of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit any additional evidence or documentation, you did not do so. 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 modify your 17 April 2020 Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling by removing reference to your violation of Section 46.2-894 of the Code of Virginia (fleeing the scene and not reporting an accident which caused greater than $1000.00 in damage), a Class 5 felony. The Board considered your contention that the charge was downgraded to a misdemeanor in civilian court due to your issues with PTSD. You also assert that you are currently receiving behavioral health assistance and that you are continuing to work through the trauma and personal issues as a result of multiple deployments while serving with an infantry battalion and reconnaissance battalion. The Board noted that, on 2 February 2020, you caused an accident with a vehicle in front of you that was stopped at a stoplight. The damage caused by the accident required both cars to be towed. When you were approached by the Marine whose car you struck, you fled the scene on foot. The police searched for you, unsuccessfully, at your residence; subsequently—four days later—the police obtained a warrant with extradition against you, and you were arrested. According to the contested Page 11 entry, a criminal history check revealed that you had a 2012 conviction for Driving Under the Influence, which was not documented in your military record. In your 23 April 2020 rebuttal, you assert, in part, that you did not remember all the events after the accident, and that you felt in fear for your life and felt that you were forward deployed in a combat zone. You also assert that you were diagnosed with a concussion due to the accident, and were approved for an outpatient therapy program. The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case. These included, but were not limited to, your desire to modify the Page 11 entry and the contentions and assertions discussed above. The Board, relying on the available evidence and applying liberal consideration, concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice that warrants modification of the contested Page 11 entry. The Board thus determined that the issuing officer, using a preponderance of the evidence standard, was well within his discretionary authority to issue the counseling entry. The entry met the 6105 counseling requirements detailed in MCO 1900.16 (MARCORSEPMAN). Specifically, the Board noted that the entry provided written notification concerning your deficiencies, specific recommendations for corrective action indicating any assistance available, a comprehensive explanation of the consequences of failure to successfully take the recommended corrective action, and a reasonable opportunity to undertake the recommended corrective action. You were afforded the opportunity to rebut the counseling, and your rebuttal is filed in your official military personnel file. Moreover, final adjudication of your civilian court case was not required before issuing the Page 11. Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. 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, 8/21/2021 Executive Director