DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 8186-16 
NOV 29 2017 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuaut to the 
provisions oftitle IO of the United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely mauner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations aud consider your application on its merits. A three
member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 18 October 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror aud injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevaut portions of your naval record aud 
applicable statutes, regulations aud policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearauce with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding ofthe issue( s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearauce was not necessary aud 
considered your case based on the evidence ofrecord. 

You reenlisted in the Navy on 27 March 1996 after more than three years ofprior service. You 
served for three years aud two months without disciplinary incident, but on 14 June I 999, you. 
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) ofwillfully damaging military property aud 
assault. The sentence imposed was confinement, a forfeiture ofpay, reduction in paygrade, aud 
a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 6 February 2001, you received a BCD after appellate review 
was complete. 

After careful aud conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found 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 contention that you were 
improperly advised by your military counsel and you were coerced into pleading guilty base on 
misrepresentation. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warraut relief in 
your case because ofthe seriousness ofyour misconduct that resulted in au SPCM. In regard to 
your contention, the Board has no authority to consider contentions pertaining to improprieties in 
court-martials and must limit its review to determining whether the sentence should be modified 
as a matter of clemency. The Board relies on a presumption ofregularity to support the official 
actions ofpublic officers and, in the absence ofsubstantial evidence to the contrary, will 
presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. Your unsupported allegations of 
improper conduct by your military counsel failed to overcm:pe that presumption. Accordingly, 
your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour 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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director