DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204·2490 

Docket No: 767-16 
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To: Secretary of the Navy 

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO FORMER 

Ref: (a) 10 u.s.c. 1552 

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments 
(2) Case Summary 
(3) HQMC (MMPR-2) memo dtd 25 Sep 15 

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 
former member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this 
Board requesting remedial promotion consideration to Staff 
Sergeant by the FY14 SSgt Selection Board due to having an 
derogatory material removed from his official military personnel 
file (OMPF). Enclosures (1) through (3) apply. 

2. The Board, consisting of 
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 
5 April 2016, 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, 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 finds as 
follows: 

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all 
administrative remedies available under existing law and 
regulations within the Department of the Navy. 

b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner. 

c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a 
period of active duty on 16 August 2004. On 14 February 2011, he 
was the subject of a Competency Review Board (CRB) for misconduct 
that subsequently administratively reduced him in rank to 
corporal. On 8 October 2013, he submitted an application to 
correct his OMPF on the basis of due process on appeal of the 
CRB's decision. On 30 July 2014, Petitioner was honorably 
discharged due to high year tenure. At that time, he was not 
recommended for promotion and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended 
for retention) reentry code. 

d. On 7 May 2015, in light of a substantiated Equal 
Opportunity (EO) complaint, the BCNR directed that Petitioner be 
reinstated to the rank of sergeant (E-5). Further, it was 
directed that all adverse material be removed from his OMPF. 
Specifically, five administrative remarks (Page ll)·entries, and 
all documents pertaining to his CRB. 

e. Enclosure (3), is an advisory opinion from Headquarters 
Marine Corps (MMPR-2) that states, in part, because the CRB 
documents were removed from Petitioner's OMPF, his original date 
of rank to sergeant was changed to 1 November 2007. Further, 
that with his original date of rank, he would have been eligible 
for promotion by the FY14 SSgt Selection Board. The board 
convened on 16 July 2014 and adjourned on 12 September 2014. 
Petitioner was discharged prior to the adjournment of the board, 
and is ineligible for promotion consideration. Recommended that 
Petitioner OMPF remain unchanged. 

f. On 4 November 2015, Petitioner's record was further 
corrected by changing his reason for separation to read 
"completion of required service," separation code read "JBK," and 
that he be given full separation pay. 

g. On 9 December 2015, the Board further corrected 
Petitioner's record by changing his reentry code to "RE-lA," and 
found that in light of all the derogatory material being removed 
from his OMPF, he would have been allowed to reenlist. However, 
his request for remedial consideration by the FY14 Staff Sergeant 
Promotion Board was not addressed by the Board. 

h. Enclosure (3) , states that Marine Corps directives 
require a Marine to identify errors, discrepancies or an 
injustice in their OMPF in a timely manner and initiate 
appropriate corrective action. Such action should take place 
prior to the convening of a selection board which considered, but 
did not select the Marine for promotion. 

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the 
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants corrective 
action. 

The Board found that Petitioner submitted his application for 
correction of his OMPF on 8 October 2013, nine months before the 
FY14 SSgt Selection Board had convened on 16 July 2014. He acted 
with due diligence in correcting his OMPF. However, his 
application was not expeditiously processed. The Board also 
agreed that in light of the substantiated EO complaint, and the 
fact that he was reinstated to sergeant, and had all derogatory 
material removed from his OMPF, that out of fairness, Petitioner 
is entitled to relief in the form of remedial promotion 
consideration by the FY14 SSgt Selection Board, because he was 
not considered for promotion due to his OMPF containing 
derogatory material that has since been removed. 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an 
injustice warranting the following corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

a. That Petitioner be granted remedial promotion 
consideration by the FY14 SSgt Selection Board due to having 
derogatory material removed from his OMPF and being reinstated to 
the rank of Sergeant. 

b. That if Petitioner is selected for promotion to Staff 
Sergeant, that his date of rank/promotion be 30 July 2014, the 
date of his discharge. 

c. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in the 
Petitioner's naval record. 

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the 
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal 
Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) 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. The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your 
review and action. 

Executive Director