Docket No: 10386-18 Dear This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel would not materially add to its 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 2019. 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 9 April 2012 and undated Administrative Remarks (Page 11/6105) counseling entries, and to be granted remedial consideration for promotion to Gunnery Sergeant (GySgt)/E-7 with back pay and allowances. The Board considered your contentions that the 9 April 2012 counseling entry was issued as reprisal for reporting wrongdoing within your command, as well as your contention that a 6105 counseling entry is an extreme and unjust measure in your case. You assert that you were late for remedial training that you should not have been assigned to attend because you were erroneously assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP). You also assert that you received verbal permission to be late and that Marines are rarely given 6105’s for the same speeding violation you committed. You also contend that the undated counseling entry is factually incorrect, imposed as reprisal for reporting wrongdoing within your command and does not contain a recommendation for corrective action or consequences for failing to take corrective action. The Board noted that pursuant to paragraph 6105 of MCO 1900.16, the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN), you were counseled both for traveling 125 KPH in an 80 KPH zone, which is classified as reckless driving by the government, and for arriving late for special remedial physical training. The Board also noted that you chose to submit a rebuttal, in which you admit to speeding on the expressway, expressed your understanding of the seriousness of your action of speeding and why the counseling entry was the chosen disciplinary action. The Board found no record evidence, and you provided no extra-record evidence yourself, to support your contentions that the 6105 counseling entry was issued in “reprisal.” Moreover, the Board found no evidence that you were erroneously assigned to the BCP or that you had permission to arrive late for remedial physical training. The Board determined that the 6105 counseling entry was written and issued in accordance with MCO 1070.12K, the Marine Corps Individual Records Administration Manual (IRAM). Specifically, the entry provided written notification concerning your deficiencies/impairments, specific recommendations for corrective action, available assistance, a comprehensive explanation of the consequences, opportunity to submit a rebuttal and your commanding officer (CO) signed the entry. Concerning the undated counseling entry and your contention that that entry was also issued in reprisal and does not contain the required elements for a 6105 counseling entry, the Board noted that you were counseled for failure to pay attention to detail and follow instructions. Specifically, being dropped from the rifle range, forgetting your ID card, and erroneously telling a fellow Marine that he was authorized to leave work to attend to personnel business for you. The Board also noted that you chose not to submit a rebuttal, although you assert that the counseling entry was erroneously marked and the rebuttal was not placed in your record. The Board found no evidence to support your contentions that the entry was issued in reprisal and that the choice not to submit a rebuttal was erroneously marked. The Board determined that the undated counseling entry is not a 6105 counseling entry. This entry documents substandard performance and as required by the IRAM, documents your performance and afforded you the opportunity to submit a rebuttal. Moreover, both entries create a permanent record of matters your commanding officers deemed significant enough to document, and as your commanding officers, they were well within their authority to issue the counseling entries. Accordingly, the Board concluded that the contested counseling entries are neither in error nor unjust, and will remain unchanged in your record. As such, the Board also concluded that there is no basis to grant an Enlisted Remedial Selection Board or back pay and allowances. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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.