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 26 January 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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 4 November 2020; a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment.   
 
The Board noted that you were promoted to Sergeant/E-5 on 1 August 2004.  On 6 November 2008 you were found guilty at non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violation of Articles 92 and 120 and were awarded reduction in rank to Corporal/E-4.  On 5 October 2010 you were discharged.  You requested to have your rank of Sergeant/E-5 restored.  The Board in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, to include your assertions in the letter you provided.  The Board concluded that on 6 November 2008, in accordance with the Marine Corps Manual, you received and signed your office hours accused notification and election of rights, where you elected to talk to a military lawyer by initialing such rights on 6 November 2008.  Further, you contend that the punishment was excessive due to commanding officer’s comments, which you stated he said you were “being held to a higher standard since I was a military policeman.”  The Board found no evidence of your punishment was excessive.  You were afforded the opportunity to appeal your NJP however, you chose not to.  On 1 December 2009 you met the 12 month time-in-grade requirement for advancement eligibility to Sergeant.  The Board concluded that you did not meet the required cutting score for advancement to Sergeant until 1 November 2010 which was after your discharged.  In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. 
 
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, 
            
2/21/2021
Deputy Director