DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 567-16/7976-09 
JAN 03 2017 

Dear

This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request dated 16 January 2015. You previously 
petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter that your applications had been disapproved. Your 
case was reconsidered in accordance with Board of Correction ofNaval Records procedures that conform 
to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 F.Supp.2d 48 (D.D. C. 2004). 

Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction of 
Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 27 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members 
ofthe panel will be furnished upon request Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of 
your application and any material submitted in support of your application. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board determined that the 
information that you provided was previously considered by the Board, and continues to be insufficient to 
establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. A review of your recent application and its 
attachments reveals that again your request must be denied. 

The Board noted that the record shows that you were notified ofand waived your procedural right to 
present your case to an administrative board (ADB). In doing so, you gave up your first and best 
opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Finally, regarding 
your assertion that you have been an upstanding citizen since discharge, the Board noted while 
commendable, your post service conduct does not alter your conduct while enlisted in the Marine Corps 
or the basis for your discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are 
entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew and material evidence within 
one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by 
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 

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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director