Docket No. 3201-20
Ref: Signature Date

 
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.     
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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 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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in Office of Legal Counsel (PERS-00J) letter of 18 May 2020; a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. 
 
On 6 October 2017, you were reduced in grade via non-judicial punishment for violation of articles 92 (1 specification) and 107 (2 specifications).  On 13 October 2017, you notified Commander, Naval ,  via the chain of command of your appeal of non-judicial punishment.  On 9 November 2017, Commander, Naval notified you that your appeal was denied and your punishment would remain in effect.  
 
On 8 February 2018, you submitted a request for redress to , and 1 March 2018,  informed you that he would not reverse his decision.  On 5 April 2020, Commanding Officer, forwarded your request dated 12 March 2020 for restoration in rate to Secretary of the Navy via Commander, Navy Personnel Command.     
 
You requested the restoration in rate to E-6/IT1, and back pay; the Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, to include your assertions.  However, the Board concluded that the Navy Personnel Command was correct in denying your application for restoration of rate.  You were found guilty of 2 specifications of Article 107.  In accordance with MILPERSMAN 1430-020, sailors are ineligible to submit a request in the following situations (the following list does not apply to ratings without an E-4 advancement exam per reference (e).  Reinstatement will be at CO’s discretion a minimum of 6 months after NJP) in which the Sailor is found guilty and reduced in rate at NJP for more than one charge or more than one specification (e.g., diverse occasions) of a charge under reference (a), article 15.  In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. 
 
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,