Dear : 
 
This letter 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 16 March 2021.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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. 
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 6 June 2019 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) that you received for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 91 (insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, non-commissioned officer, or petty officer), Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 107 (false official statement).  The Board considered your contention that the date of NJP was in 2019 but dates you were advised of your rights and Booker statement was 2016. 
 
The Board noted that the date written in for Items 2, 3, and 4 of the unit punishment book (UPB) is “160605.”  The Board determined that this is merely a scrivener’s error and not material as it made no difference to any material fact considered in the conduct of your Office Hours.  Specifically, the Board noted that, for Item 2,  you acknowledge that you had been advised of and understood your rights under Article 31, UCMJ and your right to demand trial by court-martial in lieu of NJP.  You did not demand trial and agreed to accept NJP subject to your right of appeal.  You certified that you had been given the opportunity to consult with a military lawyer prior to your decision to accept NJP.  For Item 3, your commanding officer certified that you had been afforded your rights under Article 31, UCMJ, and the right to demand trial by court-martial in lieu of NJP.  In Item 4, you acknowledged that you were given the opportunity to consult with a lawyer in regard to a pending NJP for violation of Articles 91, 92, and 107 of the UCMJ, that you understood your right to refuse NJP -- and that you chose not to exercise that right – and that you understood that acceptance of NJP did not preclude your command from taking other adverse administrative action against you.   
 
The Board also noted that all other correspondence related to your NJP, your Administrative Remarks (Page 11) counseling entries and fitness report, shows that your Office Hours was held on 6 June 2019.  The Board thus concluded that you were fully appraised of your procedural rights, presumably on 5 June 2019, prior to the imposition of NJP on 6 June 2019, and that the hand-written date of “160605” is a harmless error because the error is not of a substantive nature by which you were seriously prejudiced, and the error is not sufficiently significant to change the outcome. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require that you 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,