DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6951-20 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 20 July 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 12 September 2014 non-judicial punishment (NJP), to be promoted to E-6 effective 12 September 2014, to receive back pay, and to have corrections to your official military personnel file (OMPF) documents. You also request a special selection board for promotion consideration to E-7 for Fiscal Years (FY) 2016 through 2019, reinstatement of your active component selection effective July 2014, and assignment to a ship home ported out of , , or an Individual Augment billet. The Board considered your contentions that you were wrongfully reduced for violations of Articles 86, 91, 107 and 134, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). You also contend that you were not informed that your NJP would occur right away, you allegedly received numerous counselings that were never presented to you, you were falsely accused and charged with wearing warfare pins, but were allowed to keep them, and your command improperly delayed and processed your NJP documents. You further contend that you were advanced backward instead of being reduced. You claim that your command refused to provide your evaluation which prevented you from taking the advancement exam and your return to active duty was rescinded without notifying you, the Enlisted Community Manager, or the Navy Personnel Command (NPC). As evidence you furnished a timeline of events and character statements. The Board, however, substantially concurred with the previous Boards conclusion and AO that your NJP was valid. In this regard, the Board noted that according to your Court Memorandum, your Commanding Officer (CO) relied upon a Preliminary Inquiry and report chits from your deployed command, , as evidence of your misconduct. The Board also noted that your Detachment of Individual fitness report for the reporting period 14 March 2014 to 4 September 2014 included comments documenting an evaluation of your performance and conduct from you reporting seniors (RS). Moreover, your RS noted that your performance was unacceptable and unbecoming, and his/her comments supported your deficiencies and misconduct documented in the counseling chits. The Board found no evidence that your CO lacked a factual understanding of the circumstances. Moreover, the Board relies upon a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. The Board noted your volume of evidence, however, the Board found your evidence insufficient to overcome this presumption. The Board determined that your CO had sufficient evidence and acted within his discretionary authority pursuant to Article 15, the Manual for Courts-Marital (2012 ed.) by finding you guilty at NJP and that your awarded punishment did not exceed the maximum punishment authorized according to regulations. Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting corrective action. 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, 8/9/2021 Executive Director