Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02365-07
Original file (02365-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON
DC 20370-5100



SMW
Docket No: 2365-07
1 November 2007




This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2007. 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, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

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.

On 8 February 1985, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after a prior period of honorable service. On 11 June 1986, an incest and sexual abuse report was initiated when your 11 year old daughter disclosed that you had sexually abused her since she was nine years of age. On 24 June 1986, a psychiatric evaluation stated that you abused alcohol, had isolated sex acts with a child, and diagnosed you as having adult anti-social behavior. On 16 October 1986, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of attempted commission of carnal knowledge, rape and sodomy. The court sentenced you to reduction in rank, confinement, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On
24 November 1986, the convening authority approved the sentence and forwarded your case for appellate review. Based on the information currently contained in the record, it appears that the BCD was approved at all levels of review. On 21 September 1987, you were separated with a BCD.





The Board, in its review of your enti re record, carefully considered
all mitigation, such as your prior p eriod of honorable service. The
         Board also considered your contentions that you only plead guilty to the alleged offenses so that your daughter would not have to testify, a BCD does not reflect your military service, and you were drinking heavily at the time because of personal problems. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Regarding your contentions, an investigation preceding the SPCM shows that you admitted committing sexual acts with your daughter. Furthermore, Sailors are responsible for their conduct at all times. Therefore, conviction by a SPCM that results in a BCD is an accurate characterization of service, and excessive use of alcohol or personal problems does not excuse misconduct~. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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 submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously 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,
1~


                                                                        W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                                                                        Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02365-07

    Original file (02365-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.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.On 8 February 1985, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after a prior period of honorable service. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10654-10

    Original file (10654-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 2011. 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, your naval record, and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01141-07

    Original file (01141-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 14 March 1986 at age 19 and served without disciplinary incident...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR12070 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14

    Original file (NR12070 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015.. Asa result, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug under other ‘than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, which was in direct Gisregard to the Navy's ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policy, and conviction by civil authorities for possession of marijuana. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02574-09

    Original file (02574-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00801-99

    Original file (00801-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4410 14

    Original file (NR4410 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2015. 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, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11283-11

    Original file (11283-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07895-06

    Original file (07895-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.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.On 14 November 1985 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after two periods of prior honorable service....