DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLUNGTON, VA 22204-2490
JDR
Docket No: 2578-14
30 March 2015
- 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.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute
of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
16 March 2015. 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, began a period of active duty on
11 December 1984, and satisfactorily served without incident for
about 15 months. However, during the period from 23 April 1986
to 18 January 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on
three occasions for assault, communicating a threat,
unauthorized absence, missing ship’s movement, dereliction in
‘tthe performance of duty, and sodomy.
Subsequently, administrative separation action was initiated hy
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and
homosexuality. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected
your procedural right to submit a statement requesting a general
characterization of service. However, your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and
homosexuality. Separation was approved, but the discharge
authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason
of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on
‘20 March 1987, you were so discharged.
The Board, in.its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your period of satisfactory service and desire to upgrade your
discharge. It also considered your assertion that your
discharge was the result of your sexual preference,
Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in
your record, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your misconduct which resulted in three NJPs. Finally, with
regard to your assertion, the Board noted that, although
processed for homosexuality, you were not discharged due to your
sexual preference, but solely due to your record of misconduct.
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 within one year from the date of the Board’s
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
ERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5982 14
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05584-07
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. During the period 22 November to 22 December 1986, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for about 30 days. 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR844 14
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. Subsequently, -after waiving your procedural rights in June 1991, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due commission of a serious offense as evidenced by sexual misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09216-04
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 on 31 January 1984 at age 18. On 31 July 1986 you received NJP for assault...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4932 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1811 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Feb 05 13_50_44 CST 2001
My defense counsel did not question During the (ADB) I was upset that the (ADB) any witness and myself doing (sic) the (ADB) about (0’s) behavior. Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) make this guarantee applicable to an ADB respondent by stating that such an individual is entitled to “qualified counsel,” and defining that term as “counsel qualified under Article 27(b) of the UCMJ.” Articles 3640200.7 and 3620200.lv of the United States v. Marshall, 45 Strickland, at 687. Article...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4519 14
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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...