DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2330-17 

JUL 1 3 2018 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

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 ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 30 May 2018. The names and votes ofthe 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 ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and 
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 7 February 1994. You 
served for eight months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 
25 October 1994 to 14 May 1997, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three 
occasions. Your offenses were unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for periods totaling 25 
days, failure to go to your appointed place ofduty and incapacitation for the proper performance 
ofduty. Although the Board lacked your entire service record book (SRB) it appears from the 
SRB entries before the Board that you were subsequently involuntarily processed for separation 
by reason ofmisconduct due to a pattern ofmisconduct. In connection with this processing, you 
would have acknowledged the separation action and the separation authority would have 
approved a recommendation for separation. The record clearly shows that on 7 March 1998, you 
were discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) separation due to misconduct 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your contention that the 
punishment didn't fit the violation and that you were told before NJP there would only be a loss 
ofrank for the outcome. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief 
in your case because ofthe seriousness of your repeated misconduct that resulted in three NJPs. 
In regard to your contention the Board noted that after your first and second NJPs, you were 
counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further offenses could result in 
administrative separation. The Board relies on a presumption ofregularity to support the official 
actions ofpublic officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, will 
presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. Your allegations, unsupported 
in the record or by submission ofdocumentation failed to overcome that presumption. The 
Board in it review discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 
submission ofnew and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered 
by the Board. In the absence ofsufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the 
decision ofthe Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director