Dear  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2021.  The names and votes of the 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 of the 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 Board carefully considered your request to remove the Court Memorandum dated 30 October 2006 from your record.  You received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on 15 December 2004 for violation of Article 111 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  Your punishment included forfeiture of pay for two months, restriction for 50 days and, reduction in pay grade which was suspended for six months.  The Court Memorandum dated 27 December 2004 incorrectly included the reduction in rank in blocks 13, 14, and 15.  On 30 October 2006 a corrected Court Memorandum, regarding the 2004 NJP, was entered into your file removing the reduction in rank.  You contend that the 30 October 2006 Court Memorandum is unnecessary as the original court memorandum stated in block 42 (synopsis of offense) that the reduction in rank was suspended; and having both documents for the same offense creates the impression that you have two separate NJP’s in your record. 
 
The Board noted that the 30 October 2006 Court Memorandum corrected an administrative error in the original Court Memorandum and there is no error with the 30 October 2006 Court Memorandum.  The Board determined that the evidence was insufficient to substantiate your 
contention that the corrected Court Memorandum was unfair or procedurally defective and both Court Memorandum documents shall remain in your record. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity 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 of probable material error or injustice.   
 
 
Sincerely, 
  
2/23/2021
Executive Director