Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6361 14
Original file (NR6361 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
- Low Wile Nod Abe rip inA yt

OP CORRECTION OF NF VAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD. SUITE 100%
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

 

This is in reference to your applic
naval record pursuant to the provis
States Code, Section 1552.

ation for correction of your
ions of Title 10, United

BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 December 2014. 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, your naval record, and
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. in addition, the
Board considered its previous review of your case in November
Log.

Bfter careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error oF
injustice. In this regard, the Board substantially concurre
with the comments contained in its decisional document, Docket
No. 2080-94 date 6 November 1994, a copy of which is attached

for your informa

Your record reflects that you were commissioned to the rank of

Lieutenant (Junior Grade) on 29 November 1974 and that you were
subsequently promoted to the rank of Commander on 1 August LOB6 «
Your record further reflects that during the period from May to
December 1990, you were the subject of child sexual and physical

abuse allegations which resulted in an investigation. As such,
the Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP) directed a Board of Inquiry
(BOI). While awaiting the results of the BOI, charges,
specifically, child abuse, attempted sexual offenses, and
assault, were filed against you in civil court in February 1991
Nonetheless, the BOI recommended separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of
= serious offense. On 17 July 1991, you were acquitted by civil
authorities. However, on 27 August 1991, a Boara of Review (BOR)
found that sufficient evidence existed in your record to separate
you with an other than honorable discharge.

On_30 April 1992, the Assistant Secretary—of the Navy (Manpower
and Reserve Affairs) approved the recommendations of the BOI and
BOR and directed separation under other than honorable conditions
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense,

and on 13 May 1992, you were So discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
-your desire to upgrade your dtrscharge; change your narrative
reason of separation, and remove derogatory material from your
official military personnel file. It also considered your
assertion of false testimony by your son and his desire to recant
his testimony. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your misconduct. Finally, there is no evidence in
the record, and you provided none, to support your assertion.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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
within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. 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.

Sincerel

   
   

ROBERT |

Executive Director

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003062

    Original file (0003062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request applicant provided a personal statement; his temporary divorce order; documents associated with his request for investigation into his ex-wife’s testimony and request to convene the BOR; his discharge directive; initial and amended statements of reason; child support court order; AFPC/DPCTD employment letter; his divorce attorney’s letter; character reference; NPRC response to his request for copies of his BOR; correspondence from his Senator’s office; and, his...

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR5982 14

    Original file (NR5982 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 5 June 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. With regard to your assertions, the Board considered whether being threatened was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your discharge.

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2006-134

    Original file (2006-134.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [The applicant] should be retained in the Coast Guard. of the Personnel Manual state that a drug incident is determined by the member’s commanding officer, and the applicant’s CO had determined that there was just one drug incident. of the Personnel Manual provides that the BOR shall “review[] the records and documented evidence the board of inquiry considered and made a part of its proceedings and any additional information the officer concerned or the recorder submitted under Article...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00252

    Original file (BC-2004-00252.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 October 2000, HQ USAF/JAG reviewed the BOI record and found it legally sufficient to support the recommendation that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge On 29 November 2000, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant be separated from the United States Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He hereby request the Board to review these facts and circumstances of injustice and that his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07743-07

    Original file (07743-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval re ord, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. At Ithat time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel an to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB)| On 15 April...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11198-07

    Original file (11198-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2008. 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 26 February 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709385

    Original file (199709385.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    • The applicant denies that he sexually abused or assaulted his daughter; • There is no direct, probative or corroborating evidence that he sexually abused his daughter; • Applicant’s daughter never testified under oath regarding the allegations; • Applicant’s plea of guilty was made expressly for the purpose of his wife and daughter not having to testify at a civilian criminal trial; • The applicant’s quality of service and performance of duty attest to his good character; and • The board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709385C070209

    Original file (199709385C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel states that the applicant contends that his discharge was materially and legally in error, and unjust, in that: The applicant denies that he sexually abused or assaulted his daughter; There is no direct, probative or corroborating evidence that he sexually abused his daughter; Applicant’s daughter never testified under oath regarding the allegations; Applicant’s plea of guilty was made expressly for the purpose of his wife and daughter not having to testify at a civilian criminal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00368-11

    Original file (00368-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...