DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2515-19 Ref: Signature date 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 will 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2020. 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 11 February 2019 Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling entry from your official military personnel file (OMPF). The Board considered your contentions that the time between each alleged incident is vast and does not depict what the occurrences were, that you did not receive any formal paperwork for the incidents, just verbal conversations with no corrective action plans, and you were already slated to be removed from the battalion in November or December 2018 due to your limited duty status. You also assert that your replacement was introduced during a command and staff meeting and was then pulled back, putting you back in the seat and creating confusion within the section and the battalion, that you have had no other paperwork in the 15 years and 10 months that you have been on active duty, and that the timeliness of this negative paperwork can adversely affect my ability to re-enlist. The Board noted that, on 11 February 2019, you were issued a Page 11 6105 entry counseling you after you were relieved of your duties as the operations chief due to your misconduct. Specifically, your violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation); Article 90 (willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer); and Article 89 (disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer). You chose to submit a rebuttal, and that rebuttal is in your OMPF. With regard to your contention that the time between each alleged incident is vast and does not depict what the occurrences were, the Board noted that each of your four violations of the UCMJ are described in the Page 11 and in your rebuttal, in sufficient detail for readers to understand what occurred. Additionally, it was apparent to the Board that your commanding officer (CO) determined it necessary to include the incidents in your counseling, which span over a one-year period of time, because they reveal the pattern of your misconduct that led to your relief. With regard to your contention that you did not receive any formal paperwork for the incidents, just verbal conversations with no corrective action plans, the Board noted that you were “verbally counseled immediately that your actions were unacceptable” on four separate occasions. The Board determined that it was not a requirement for you to be issued formal paperwork or action plans prior to your CO issuing you your contested Page 11. The Board also considered your remarks that you were already slated to be removed from the battalion in November or December 2018, that your replacement had been introduced during a command and staff meeting, that you have not had any other derogatory material in over 15 years of service, and that this negative paperwork can adversely affect your ability to re-enlist. The Board, however, determined that you did not sufficiently demonstrate how these factors establish an error or injustice with the issuance of the Page 11 counseling entry. Moreover, the Board determined that the counseling entry creates a permanent record of a matter your CO deemed significant enough to document, and your evidence did not prove otherwise. The Board also determined that 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 correction 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 that rebuttal is included in your record. The Board thus concluded that the record does not constitute probable material error or injustice warranting corrective action. 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. Sincerely, 4/20/2020