DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S$. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 4928-13
14 May 2014
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 7 May 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.
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
17 November 1986 at age 19. On 12 June 1990, you were the
subject of a Navy investigation regarding your participation in
homosexual acts on board the USS CONSTELLATION. You made a
written statement, that you considered yourself to be bisexual
since age 19 and that you had performed homosexual acts with two
Sailors. As a result, you were notified of pending
administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to homosexuality. After consulting with
legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 6 August 1990, the ADB
found that you committed misconduct and recommended that you be
separated with an OTH. The separation authority agreed with the
recommendation of the ADB and directed your commanding officer
to issue you an OTH due to homosexuality and on 14 September
1990, 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 desire to upgrade your discharge under the “Don't
ask - don’t tell” policy repeal. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
vecharacterization oaf,your discharge because of your
participation in homosexual acts on board a naval vessel which
is sufficient, even under current standards, to warrant an OTH
discharge. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
riames 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, tthe burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7035 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 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 | CY2010 | 06294-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. At that time you waived your rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case Lo an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 11436-10
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06169-10
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 25 September 1990 an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8234 13
You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). However, the Board concluded that your application should be denied in light of the aggravating circumstances of your committing an indecent act for indirect compensation and other serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden 4s on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error ofr injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08836-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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 | CY2010 | 06660-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization for discharge, given your homosexual...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01889 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 December 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, the Board found an aggravating factor, namely your engaging in the act onboard a naval vessel.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7340 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7015. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2014. On 29 August 1980, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) recharacterized your service as general under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3480-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 3014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative _regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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.