Docket No: 4397-20 Ref: Signature Date Dear 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 11 May 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. The Board carefully considered your request to review and (implicitly) remove your 21 October 2019 unit punishment book (UPB)/non-judicial punishment (NJP) and 21 October 2019 Administrative Remarks (page 11) entries. The Board considered your contentions your punishment was disproportionate to your charges. You claim that you were mistreated by the personnel handling your NJP, specifically, you were denied the right to a lawyer, the NJP paperwork was not explained to you, and no one would explain why you were receiving NJP while there was an ongoing investigation. You also claim that you were told to be quiet and sign. The Board noted that you received NJP for violating Article 87 (fleeing apprehension by hiding from a person authorized to apprehend you) and Article 131 (failing to disclose your identity when ordered to by police aboard a military installation), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The Board also noted that you were properly notified of your Article 31, UCMJ rights, you accepted NJP, you were afforded your right to appeal the NJP, and although you initially elected not to appeal your commanding officer’s (CO’s) decision, on 15 November 2019 you submitted an appeal. The Board noted, too, that your appeal was denied and the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) for the noted that your appeal was not timely, the punishment imposed was within the reasonable discretion of your commander, and witnesses claim you were told that you could speak to an attorney ashore through an arrangement with the . The Board determined that your CO’s finding of guilt during your NJP was just and within his discretionary authority pursuant to Article 15, the Manual for Courts-Marital (2016 ed.). The Board noted, too, that your page 11 entries were written and issued according to the Individual Records Administration Manual. The Board found no evidence that you were mistreated or that your chain of command acted improperly or contrary to regulations and you provided none. Moreover, the Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official action of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharge their official duties. 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, 5/17/2021 Executive Director