DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 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 applications on 26 August 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 applications, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would 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. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 15 January 2020 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and restore all rights and privileges, to include paygrade to E-5, pay and allowances, and your Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (MCMAP) Black Belt. The Board did not consider your request to remove your fitness report for the reporting period 1 April 2019 to 15 January 2020 because you did not first exhaust all available administrative remedies by petitioning the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) before petitioning this Board. The Board considered your contention that your punishments were unjust and that the NJP should be removed due to the mishandling of the investigation and because a similar case was dropped against a staff noncommissioned officer (SNCO). You assert that, comparable to you, a SNCO was charged with violation of Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation), Uniform Code of Military Justice, for consuming alcohol while deployed. You also assert that the SNCO, however, was issued an Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling entry, promoted, and retained on active duty. You also argue that the investigation into the alleged misconduct, and your NJP were accessible on a public share drive for all personnel to see. With regard to your NJP, the Board determined that the Marine Corps properly followed all of its procedures for awarding an NJP. You were advised of your right to refuse NJP and demand trial by court-martial in lieu of NJP, but you chose not to. You were also given an opportunity to consult counsel prior to accepting NJP. You agreed to accept NJP subject to your right of appeal, but you did not appeal. The Board thus determined that your Commanding Officer was well within his discretionary authority to impose NJP, and disagreeing with the action taken against you does not make it improper. With regard to your contention that you did not receive equal punishment as the SNCO, the Board determined that it does not have purview concerning the matters of another individual and can only consider the matters relevant to your case. The Board also determined that your allegation of a mishandled investigation is not under its purview because it is not an error in your official military personnel file. 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, 9/1/2021 Executive Director