Dear 

This letter is in reference to your application 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 
1 October 2019. 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, 
and policies. 

The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 28 June 2017 nonjudicial 
punishment (NJP) from your official military personnel file (OMPF). The Board considered 
your contentions that your commanding officer (CO) did not apply the preponderance of the 
evidence standard as required by JAGINST 5800.7F, that there was no evidence presented that 
demonstrated the NJP was just or required, and that your Board of Inquiry (BOI) later found that 
there was no basis for the NJP. 

The Board noted that a preliminary inquiry (PI) into your alleged fraternization and adultery 
revealed that, while on active duty, you violated a lawful general order by wrongfully engaging 
in an unduly familiar relationship that did not respect differences in rank and grade, and that your 
conduct fell far short of that expected of a naval officer. You were advised of your Article 31(b), 
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) rights, and, on 22 June 2017, you received NJP for 
violation of Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation - OPNAVINST 5370.2D). Although 
you pleaded not guilty, your CO determined that “[b]y [your] actions, [you] ha[ve] shown [your] 
character is not in keeping with the standards expected of a naval officer.” You were awarded a 
punitive letter of reprimand, and did not appeal your NJP or submit a response to the letter of 
reprimand. 

On 28 June 2017, your CO submitted to the Naval Personnel Command (PERS-834) a report of 
your misconduct. Your CO determined that your NJP negatively impacted your capacity to lead 
your department and execute your collateral duties, especially as Command Management Equal 
Opportunity Manager, and he recommended that you be detached for cause (DFC). You were 
notified that the derogatory material would be filed in your OMPF, and, although you were 
afforded an opportunity to submit a statement, you declined to make a statement. The 
Commander, Naval  Force , concurred with your CO’s recommendation for your 
DFC, and also recommended that you be required to show cause. Your DFC was approved by 
the Deputy Chief of Naval Personnel on 22 February 2018. 

On 9 May 2018, the BOI (by vote of 3 to 0) determined that the preponderance of evidence did 
not support your separation by reason of misconduct or by reason of substandard performance. 
On 14 May 2018, PERS-834 notified you that you were retained for naval service. 

Regarding your contentions that your CO did not apply the preponderance of the evidence 
standard, and that there was no evidence presented that demonstrated the NJP was just or 
required, the Board noted that your CO relied on, in part, a PI that revealed you violated Article 
92 of the UCMJ. Additionally, the Board noted that you did not appeal the NJP, and you did not 
submit a written rebuttal to the punitive letter of reprimand or the 28 June 2018 Report of NJP. 
Regarding your contention that the BOI found that there was no basis for the NJP, the Board 
noted that the BOI is an “employment” tool. The scope of the BOI is not judicial, but to form 
findings and recommendations that provide a basis for separation for cause, or retirement in the 
current grade or a lesser grade, and to present matters favorable to their case on the issues of 
separation and characterization of service. The Board determined that the BOI’s findings were 
not binding on your CO, who had independent authority to determine whether you committed 
misconduct. 

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 that you 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.