DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 11178-19 Ref: Signature Date 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 2 February 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, as well as the 8 May 2020 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (MMPR-2) and your response. The Board carefully considered your request to back date your date-of-rank (DOR) for promotion to Master Sergeant (MSgt/E-8) for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 USMC Sergeants Major through Master Sergeant Selection Board. The Board considered your contention that there were significant legal and unjust errors in your record, specifically, your unit punishment book (UPB) includes a specification for violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) (instructing a recruit to physically strike other recruits). You assert that the specification was present during the FY 2016 through FY 2019 selection boards and the presence of the specification defamed your character and was the reason you were not selected. You assert that this Board approved removal of the specification from your UPB. The Board, however, substantially concurred with the referenced AO. In this regard, the Board noted that you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on 3 September 2012 for one violation of Article 91, UCMJ, and five violations of Article 92, UCMJ, and you received an adverse fitness report for receiving NJP. The Board also noted that your adverse material was present in your record when you were selected for promotion by the FY 2019 selection board. With regard to your contention that this Board previously approved to remove the specification from you UPB, the Board clarified that in 2018, it recommended that an erroneous entry in your UPB be replaced by a an entry documenting one violation of Article 91 and five violations of Article 92. The Board noted, too, that according to the Marine Corps promotion board precepts, selection board members are charged with selecting the best qualified for promotion to meet the needs of the Marine Corps, and the selection board process is confidential, therefore the reason for non-selections during the FY 2016 through FY 2018 selection boards is unknown. The Board determined that, even if you had exercised due diligence, your record still contained adverse material that would have been considered by the selection board and would have affected their decision. The Board also determined that your response to the AO and evidence provided were insufficient to conclude that the presence of your contested specification was the reason you were not selected for promotion by the FY 2016 through FY 2018 selection boards. Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy or injustice warranting corrective action. 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, 2/17/2021 Executive Director