DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

YTC 
Docket No: 2988-17 

OCT 3 8 201B 


Dear : 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle IO of the United States Code, section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable material 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 22 August 2018. The names and votes of the 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 proceediqgs ofthi~ 
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. 

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

You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserves on 9 October 2008, and entered into an eight-year 
contract with a four-year active duty obligation. You began a period ofactive duty on 1 June 
2009. You were counseled on 5 March 2014, for speeding while driving a government vehicle. 
On 4 June 2015, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating Article 92 (sexual 
harassment-failure to obey lawful general order by making unwelcome and inappropriate 
remarks of a sexual nature toward a female Private First Class under your charge). On 29 March 
2017, you were counseled regarding Social Media Guidance. Your fitness report for the period 
of 1 October 2016 through 31 March 2017, states "rarely do (your) desires, motivations, and 
performance correlate ... (a)s a result, (you) frequently instill doubt in .... leadership, peers, and subordinates alike." Your RO noted that you are a dedicated and enthusiastic NCO. You were 
discharged from the Marine Corps on 5 June 2017, on the basis ofnon-retention on active duty, 
and received an honorable characterization ofservice and a reentry (RE) code ofRE-4. 

You request a change to your RE-4 to an RE-3 or an RE-I. You state that you earned the rank of 
sergeant twice while in the Marine Corps and held a manger position at the 2d Marine Regiment 
Headquarters Company, Communications Security Vault. Aside from that, you have volunteered 
your personal time to serve as a coach for youth football and basketball. You ask that the Board 
reconsider the RE code so that you can continue in the Marine Corps. You also request that your 
NJP be looked at due to an insufficient date which could have been key evidence in finding you 
not guilty. You state that the Unit Punishment Book and rebuttal and witness statements were 
not provided and assert that your command never recognized your attempts to fight the case. 
Believes the NJP is unjust and erroneous. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application and noted your assertions regarding your NJP. 
The Board found, however, that based on the information in your record, your NJP appears to 
have been properly executed. Absent evidence that the Board deprived you ofyour rights in 
accordance with the regulatory guidance regarding NJPs, the Board concluded that your NJP was 
conducted appropriately. The Board noted that your RE-4 was assigned in conjunction with your 
separation based on non-retention on active duty. Given the nature of your NJP and your 
performance as reflected in your final discharge, the Board found that the RE-4 was 
appropriately assigned following your non-retention. The Board noted that you wish to continue 
your military service, but determined that you did not provide sufficient evidence to support a 
change to your RE-4 as a matter of clemency. 

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 

2