DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3816-19 Ref: Signature Date This letter is in reference to your application of 28 March 2019 for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 2020. 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 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 Board carefully considered your request to remove your 31 October 2017 Administrative Remarks (Page 11) 6105 counseling entry from your official military personnel file (OMPF). The Board considered your contention that the counseling is unjust because the camera flashed red because of how your car hit the curb when you were making a left turn. You assert that you called the Recruiting Station Sergeant Major to inform him, and he “blasted [you]” for using your phone, even though you were only using it for the GPS. The Board noted that, on 8 August 2017, you were issued a non-punitive letter of caution due to texting while driving in a government vehicle. On 19 October 2017, you were issued a Page 11 6105 entry counseling you for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) by disobeying a statement of understanding for the use of government vehicles while serving as a canvasing recruiter, because you were found driving a government vehicle, for a second time, while using a hand-held cellular device. You acknowledged (signed) the entry and chose not to submit a rebuttal. On 31 October 2017, you were issued the contested Page 11 6105 counseling. You were again, counseled for disobeying a statement of understanding for the use of government vehicles while serving as a canvasing recruiter because you were found driving for a third time while using a hand-held cellular device while operating a government vehicle. You acknowledged (signed) the entry and chose not to submit a rebuttal. The Board determined that your contentions are without merit, and that it is irrelevant of how or why you were caught driving for a third time using a hand-held cellular device, or what your sergeant major’s reaction was. The Board also determined that the entry met the 6105 counseling requirements detailed in MCO 1900.16 (MARCORSEPMAN). Specifically, the Board noted that the entry provided written notification concerning deficiencies, specific recommendations for correction action indicating any assistance available, comprehensive explanation of the consequences of failure to successfully take the recommended corrective action, and a reasonable opportunity to undertake the recommended corrective action. You were also afforded the opportunity to rebut the counseling, but chose not to. The Board thus concluded that the contested entry does not constitute probable material error or injustice warranting corrective action. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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, 4/20/2020