Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04520-06
Original file (04520-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD.S
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO       



                  CRS
 Docket No: 4520-06
19 March 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 7 March 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 8 June 1984 after six years of prior active service. The record reflects that you received two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs). The offenses included an unauthorized absence of a day and reckless driving.
On 9 February 1989 your wife complained to authorities that you had sexually molested your stepdaughter since 1986. On 12 April 1990 the Family Advocacy Case Review Subcommittee substantiated the charge that you had molested your stepdaughter, and recommended administrative separation.
On 11 July 1990 an administrative discharge board (ADB) found that you had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and you were discharged on 10 August 1990 with an other than honorable discharge.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that you did not know that your stepdaughter was underage. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given the seriousness of the offense and the findings of the case review subcommittee and the ADB. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The na m es 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,



W. DEAN PFEIFFER
         Executive Director
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02106-11

    Original file (02106-11.pdf) 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01214 12

    Original file (01214 12.pdf) 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. On 28 May 1995 you were so discharged. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11615-10

    Original file (11615-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16, August 2011. 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you due to your diagnosed personality disorder.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02500-98

    Original file (02500-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2500-98 14 April 1999 Dears This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United \ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. also married with two daughters, ages 18...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02511-01

    Original file (02511-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In its response, COMNAVBASE forwarded the psychosexual evaluation and two favorable progress reports and, based on a favorable recommendation from the commanding officer of the NLSO, recommended Petitioner's enrollment in the FAP. "had discretion to formally accept or deny from,this t. The directive governing the FAP states that once the command notifies PERS-661 of allegations of child abuse, the member is ineligible to transfer or reenlist until the case is resolved. Administrative...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04198-12

    Original file (04198-12.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 February 2013. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04203-07

    Original file (04203-07.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 18 July 1989, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 23 after a prior period of honorable service. On...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09972-05

    Original file (09972-05.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 9 February 1989 at age 20 and reported for three years of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08188-09

    Original file (08188-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2010. 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. 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 | CY2007 | 00420-07

    Original file (00420-07.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 July 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...