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

DocketNo: 1326-18/4506-17 

MAY 05 2018 


Dear : 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 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 of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

Your application was initially considered by a panel ofthe Board on 8 January 2018, and that 
panel recommended denying relief. However, after approval and publication ofthe Board's 
decision, additional mitigating information that was not available to the earlier Board was 
identified. Specifically, your rebuttal statement to the advisory opinion (AO) was not available 
for consideration by the Board. Therefore, your application was subsequently referred to a new 
panel for reconsiqeration. The new panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered 
your application on 14 March 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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. The Board also considered the enclosed AO provided by Navy 
Personnel Command (PERS-32) and your rebuttal statement dated 4 December 2017. 

The Board carefully considered your desire to remove your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) 
imposed on 21 June 2016, and your contested Evaluation Report and Counseling Record (Eva!) 
from your official military personnel file. The Board considered your contention that you were 
wrongfully punished, that an administrative discharge board found no wrong doing of a fellow 
student, and that your contested Eval is a result of the unjust NJP. The Board also considered 
your rebuttal contention that a fellow student's NJP was overturned, but yours was not, only 
because you withdrew your appeal in order to continue on with your career. You argued that the 
revocation ofyour security clearance and the resulting negative marks on your service record are 
unjust and improper when compared to the other student, who was brought up on charges at the 
same NJP and who later appealed the NJP and had it overturned. The Board significantly
concurred with the AO and concluded that the evidence you submitted on your behalfdid not 
sufficiently substantiate the existence ofan error or injustice regarding the contested Eval. 

Further, the Board concluded that the Commanding Officer's decision to impose NJP was 
appropriate, within his discretionary authority and administratively and procedurally correct as 
written and filed. Finally, the Board noted that you voluntarily withdrew your appeal, and 
accepted the punishment imposed. 

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