DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 3411-19 
Ref: Signature Date 

This letter is in reference to your 1 January 2018 reconsideration request.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application (Docket #10899-14) had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.  
    
In your previous petition to the Board, you requested removal of your 7 November 2009 non­judicial punishment (NJP), restoration to the grade of E-5, subsequent promotions, and a new DD 214 to reflect your corrected grade and reenlistment code (RE-1) under MILPERSMAN 1910-108. 
In your current application, you again request removal of your 7 November 2009 NJP, restoration to the grade of E-5, subsequent promotions, and a new DD 214 to reflect your corrected grade and reenlistment code (RE-1) under MILPERSMAN 1910-108. 

A three-member panel, sitting in executive session, considered your request 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 contention that your NJP was rushed to ensure you would not be permitted to request a court-martial, because your ship, the                            was approaching shore.  You also contend that, during 2018, your commanding officers were accused of misconduct.   

The Board noted that you received NJP for violation of Article 117, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for using provoking speech and gestures while holding a knife, and you were awarded reduction in grade to E-3.  The Board also noted your fitness report for the reporting period 25 May 2009 to 7 November 2009 that documented your NJP and reduction in grade. The Board noted, too, that you acknowledged the report and elected not to submit a statement. The Board determined that your decision not to submit a statement indicates that you acknowledged the reason for the report and did not object to its basis.  The Board also determined that, pursuant to the Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM), as a member attached to or embarked aboard a vessel, you did not have right to demand trial by court-martial.   

Concerning your contention that your commanding officers were accused of misconduct, the Board determined that any potential misconduct by your COs that occurred more than nine years after your NJP is unrelated and has no bearing on your request.  The Board thus determined there is no material error or injustice warranted corrective action.  

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 


4/15/2020