Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02068-11
Original file (02068-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SJN
Docket No: 02068-11
2 December 2011

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 29 November 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, 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on

2 September 1959. On 8 November 1960, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for four days of unauthorized absence (UA). The
Board found that although you did not specifically address the
reason for your discharge, on 10 December 1960, you submitted a
Sworn statement to the legal office admitting to participating in
homosexual acts. In your statement you admitted that you were
offered and received money to engage in homosexual acts on more
than one occasion, and twice with one individual. As a result of
your statement you were processed for an administrative discharge
by reason of homosexuality as evidenced by your own admission.

On 12 December 1960, you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of UA and missing ship’s movement. You were sentenced to
hard labor, restriction, and a reduction in paygrade. On

10 January 1961, after being informed of your procedural rights,
you signed a statement that you would accept an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge for homosexual involvement. On

7 February 1961, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation to discharge you by reason of homosexuality with a
discharge under OTH conditions. On 21 February 1961, the
separation authority concurred and directed that you be separated
with an OTH discharge by reason of homosexuality. You were so
discharged on 3 March 1961.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service and the events that resulted in your SPCM. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your NUP, SPCM
conviction, and sworn statement of homosexual acts for
compensation. In this regard, the Board noted that you admitted
to participating in homosexual acts under aggravating
circumstances that have an adverse impact on morale and
discipline. In your case, you were offered and received money to
engage in homosexual acts on more than one occasion and twice
with one individual, which is sufficient even under current
standards to warrant an OTH discharge. The Board also concluded
that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when
you were discharged rather than being tried by court-martial,
which could have resulted in a lengthy period of confinement as
well as a punitive discharge. The Board concluded your discharge
was proper as issued and no change is warranted. 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,

\y Wad

W. DEAN PFET
Executive Dintegcter

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2485 14

    Original file (NR2485 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 24 April 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. In your case, the Board found misconduct and aggravating factors.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR576 14

    Original file (NR576 14.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. 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, the Board found misconduct and aggravating factors.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4317 14

    Original file (NR4317 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. fier 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, the Board found aggravating factors.

  • 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091390C070212

    Original file (2003091390C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He had engaged in homosexual relationships during the time he was enlisted and up until the present, but not with anyone in military service. There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant admitted to being a homosexual no less than three times and signed sworn statements to that effect at least twice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04667-11

    Original file (04667-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. In your case, you committed these acts while onboard a naval vessel under aggravating circumstances, which is not acceptable in today’s Navy,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06161-07

    Original file (06161-07.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you were commissioned as an ensign in the Navy on 6 June 1945. You were so...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06161-07

    Original file (06161-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 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. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record of service in the Navy,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03174 12

    Original file (03174 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your sworn statement that you engaged in homosexual acts on base that were witnessed by another service member. 654 (Repeal), the Board can grant a request to upgrade a discharge - based on homosexuality when two conditions are met: (1) the original discharge was based solely on DADT or similar policy in place prior to enactment of DADT and (2) there were no aggravating...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11436-10

    Original file (11436-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘ application on 20 July 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...