DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 2800-16 JUN 13 2017 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 U.S.C. §1552. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe panel willbe furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. Of the available records, it was noted that you enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 21 October 1996. On 9July1998, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation ofthe Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice (UCMJ) Article 91, insubordinate conduct towards a Warrant Officer, NCO, or a Petty Officer. On 30 July 1998, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation ofthe UCMJ, Article 86, leaving your place ofduty. On 30 September 1998, you received an NJP for VUCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence (UA). On 23 November 1998, you received an NJP for a second incident whereby you violated UCMJ Article 91, insubordinate conduct towards a NCO. Additionally, on 20 August 1999 you were advised of your rights, elected not to consult with counsel and notified that you were being processed for an administrative discharge under Other Than Honorable (OTH) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 2 September 1999, you were convicted at a summary court martial (SCM) for failure to obey an order or regulation. As a result ofthe foregoing, an administrative discharge board (ADB) was held. The ADB unanimously found that you committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and recommended that you be discharged with an OTH characterization of service. Thereafter, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge due to misconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. On 14 January 2000, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your character ofservice and rationale for your misconduct. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case, because no error or injustice was identified in its review ofyour record. Accordingly, your application has been denied. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director