DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 2689-17 

AUG 2 5 2018 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

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 threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 25 June 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions ofyour naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 27 October 1981. On 9 November 
1982, a medical note entry states, in part, that you were seen as a result ofbeing accused ofbeing 
a homosexual, in that you performed a sex act on another crewmember. At the time, you stated 
that you were confused and scared. You requested an evaluation for homosexuality and for your 
psychiatric condition. You mentioned acts involving another male who you considered a friend 
and stated he did not consider yourself a homosexual, but stated he had concerns about being on 
sea duty and wanted to make sure another incident did happen again. At that time, you were 
found to be fit for full duty. On 27 September 1985, administrative discharge action was 
initiated by reason ofhomosexuality. After having been afforded all ofyour procedural rights, 
your case was forwarded to the discharge authority recommending you receive an other than 
honorable (OTH) discharge. On 30 September 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) 
for indecent acts with another and received a reduction in paygrade. On 2 October 1985, your 
commanding officer (CO) forwarded your case recommending that you receive a general 
discharge. Your CO stated, in part, that your first incident occurred when you attempted to 
commit a homosexual act by offering fellatio. Your second incident occurred when you 
committed an indecent act on a shipmate. He stated your professional performance had been 
excellent, however, during underway operations, you approached a shipmate that was sleeping 
and awakened him by fondling his private parts. The assaulted sailor was able to positively 
identify you and immediately alerted others in the compartment. During the investigation, 
another crew member came forward and reported a similar homosexual incident by you, which 
he had been afraid to report because of the type ofincident. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade 
your characterization ofservice and change pursuant to the Don't ask, Don't tell Repeal Act of 
2010. The Board also·considered your post service statements and success. However, the Board 
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge given 
your sexual acts and misconduct. The Board noted that your involvement in sexual acts had an 
adverse impact on morale and discipline. Under the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, 
and the Under Secretary of Defense Memo of 20 September 2011 (Correction ofmilitary records 
following repeal of 10 U.S.C. §654), the Board can grant a request to upgrade a discharge that 
was based on homosexuality when two conditions are met: (1)the original discharge was based 
solely on "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) or similar policy, and (2) there were no aggravating 
factors such as misconduct. In reviewing your record, the Board determined aggravating factors 
existed and concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all 
official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director