Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11436-10
Original file (11436-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TAL
Docket No: 11436-10
27 July 2011

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 20 July 2011. 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.

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 and began a period of active
duty on 23 June 1966 at age 18. On 9 November 1966, while under
investigation by the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI}, you
stated in part that you first realized you possessed homosexual
tendencies while in recruit training but had never engaged in
such acts. On 13 December 1966, you made another statement to
ONI. You admitted that in January 1966 you were picked up while
hitchhiking and participated in homosexual acts for money and
fair to New Jersey. On 31 March 1967 you were convicted by
summary court-martial of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit
for a period of 19 days. On 6 June 1967, you were notified of
pending administrative discharge processing with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (fraudulent
enlistment). After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
26 dune 1967, you received nonjudicial punishment for UA from
your unit for a period of four days. On 13 July 1967 the ADB
found that you committed misconduct and recommended that you be
separated with an OTH discharge. On 15 December 1967, you were
convicted by special court-martial of UA from your unit for a
period of 35 days. The sentence imposed was confinement for four
months, and a forfeiture of pay. The convening authority
suspended two months of confinement and the forfeiture for six
months. The commanding officer concurred with the ADB and
forwarded his recommendation to the separation authority. On 22
January 1968, you again received NUP for insubordinate conduct
toward a noncommissioned officer. The separation authority
agreed with the findings and recommendation of the ADB and
directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH discharge by
reason of misconduct due to fraudulent enlistment, and on 29
March 1968, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, one SCM, one SPCM and
your admission of participation in homosexual acts prior to
enlistment for compensation which is sufficient, even under
current standards, to warrant an OTH discharge. 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,
W. DEAN PF R
Executive recor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04144-12

    Original file (04144-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2013. As a result of the ONI investigation, on 25 September 1968, administrative discharge action was initiated and it was recommended that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to engaging in a homosexual act on 15 July 1968. In your case, the Board found an aggravating factor.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00456 12

    Original file (00456 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 24 October 2012. On 28 September 1965, you received NJP for being UA for seven days. In this regard, the Board noted that you admitted to participating in homosexual acts under aggravating circumstances by receiving compensation.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05791-10

    Original file (05791-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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. 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 | CY2009 | 08496-09

    Original file (08496-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. 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 ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4068-13

    Original file (NR4068-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . _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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02717-11

    Original file (02717-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2012. 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. You requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3639 13

    Original file (NR3639 13.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 April 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 04038-11

    Original file (04038-11.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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12

    Original file (01145 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 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • 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...