Docket No. 4310-19 
Ref: Signature Date 



This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been denied.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on March 13, 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

On 1 May 1978, you were promoted to Master Sergeant and you were eligible for promotion in 1981; however, you were not selected. For year 1981, MOS 61XX, there were 5 allocations and 10 were considered. For year 1982, MOS 61XX, there were 2 allocations and 5 were considered. For year 1983, MOS 61XX, there were 1 allocations and 4 were considered. For year 1984, MOS 61XX, there were 2 allocations and 8 were considered. On 28 July 1983, you extended for19 months in order to complete additional service for retirement.  Your new Expiration of Active Service (EAS)/End of Current Contract (ECC) was 21 March 1985. On 12 December 1984, you requested a 4 month extension to await results of promotion board, which was denied on 27 December 1984 via message. On 4 January 1985, Commandant of the Marine Corps disapproved your request for additional service due to service limitations.  Your service limitation was 27 years of active service, which you had achieved. On 10 January 1985, you submitted a reenlistment request, which was disapproved on 12 February 1985.  On 21 March 1985, you were transferred to the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve with over 27 years of active service. 

You requested promotion to Master Gunnery Sergeant with the contention that you were denied an extension of service; the Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, to include your assertions.  However, the Board concluded that in the years of 1981 through 1984 your military occupational specialty (MOS) had allocations for each of those years.  You had extended for 19 months in order to complete additional service for retirement. You submitted a 4 month extension to await results of promotion board; however, it was denied due to service limitations. 

The Board concluded that there was no evidence that you were selected for promotion, or that the Marine Corps approved any further service beyond your EAS/ECC, which already exceeded your service limitations. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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.