DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 929-17 
JUL 3 0 2018 


Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval.record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10 ofthe 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 injus.tice. 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 ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 23 April 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions ofyour naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 29 January 1985. On 3 August 
1988, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) and breaking 
restriction. In your letter, you asserted, in part, that you were pulled over by military police 
(MP) on     Corps Base. Under the seat, the MP stated that the can had some 
sort ofresinlooking material on it. However, to your knowledge, there was no investigation. 
Additionally, that after serving over four years of service, you were asked what you wanted to do 
about the matter. You stated that you wanted to go home and was told that after a month, you 
could have your discharge upgraded to honorable. Your original service record was incomplete 
and did not contain any documentation pertaining to your separation from the Navy, however 
your Certificate ofRelease of Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) states you were 
released from active duty in lieu oftrial by court-martial on 17 March 1989. 

The Board, in its review ofyour record and application carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factor, including your assertion that there was no investigation into the potential resin 
on the soda can found in your car. The Board noted that you did not provide no evidence to 
support your assertions. Absent such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of 
regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law and policy, 
and in good faith. 

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. 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, 

Director