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

Docket No. 6015-17 

JUL 0 3 2018 

This is in reference to your reconsideration request received on 14 July 2017. You previously 
petitioned the Board and were advised in our 3 January 2017 letter, that your application had 
been denied. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board for Correction of Naval 
Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F.Supp.2d 48 
(D.O.C. 2004). After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board 
found that the new evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable 
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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 30 April 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The advisory opinion provided by the Navy 
Personnel Command (NPC) 1070 PERS-312 was sent to you on 4 October 2017 for an 
opportunity to comment prior to being considered by the Board. After the 30-day period for 
comment expired without a response, the case was presented to the Board. 

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 ofthe issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

The Board considered the new evidence you provided, including your occupation, training, 
awards, and history page. However, the Board substantially concurred with the comments 
contained in the advisory opinion and noted that although you were designated to wear the 
Enlisted Submarine Warfare Insignia (ESWI) on 29 March 1973, the ESWI is a designation and 
not a badge. Therefore, the ESWI is not an authorized entry on a 00214. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour reconsideration petition arc 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 of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. 

It is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity 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