Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03170-08
Original file (03170-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 3170-08
18 May 2009

 

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 13 May 2009. 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 enlisted in the Navy on 24 January 1968.
You received four nonjudicial punishments for offenses that
included unauthorized absences and missing movement.

On 30 June 1969 an administrative discharge board recommended
your separation due to your statement that you had committed
numerous homosexual acts in cars with civilians. You received a
general discharge by reason of unfitness due to homosexual acts
on 5 August 1969.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall

service record, as well as your belief that your discharce would
be “considered honorable” after a certain period of time. The
Board concluded that those factors are insufficient to warrant
the upgrade of your general discharge. It concluded that you
were fortunate to have received a general discharge, given your
extensive disciplinary record. It noted that there are no
provisions of law or regulation for the upgrade of a discharge
based solely on the passage of time. In addition, the Board noted
that under current policy pertaining to the discharge of service
members for homosexuality, a general discharge would be
permissible in a case such as yours. 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,

Ta >, FR

ROBERT D\/ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03537-01

    Original file (03537-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During this period you Subsequently, on 30 December 1969, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of the foregoing 141 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, reduction to and forfeitures were suspended for four months. and the reason I went UA in the first place was the fear of being caught in a homosexual act with someone in the service." My biggest fear since I can't On 28 January 1970 you were notified of pending administrative separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04361-09

    Original file (04361-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2009. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall record of service, but found those factors insufficient to warrant the upgrade of your discharge > In addition, the Board found that had current standards been in effect in 1969, you would have been processed for separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02386-08

    Original file (02386-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire _record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to.establish the existence of probablé material error or injustice. He recommended a general discharge since you had admitted your homosexual activities, and agreed to waive your right to an administrative discharge board in return for a general discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03412-09

    Original file (03412-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 29 April 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00959-09

    Original file (00959-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04495-09

    Original file (04495-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive séssicon, considered your application on 16 October 2009. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 09695-08

    Original file (09695-08.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. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall service, and the contention that your problems started after your Car accident. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02174-09

    Original file (02174-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2009. 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 | CY2014 | NR5905 14

    Original file (NR5905 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 22 May 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. In your case, you engaged in homosexual acts onboard a Naval vessel, which is sufficient even under current standards to warrant an OTH discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01043-01

    Original file (01043-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 9 October The record reflects that you 1961 for four years at age 19. were advanced to CTSN (E-3) and served without incident until 21 February 1963 when a Royal Air Force (RAF) noncommissioned officer (NCO) made a statement to a criminal investigator alleging that on the evening of 12 February 1963, after both of you had been drinking, you made inappropriate advances toward him by putting your hand on his crotch and undoing his trousers...