DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 9016-17 
JAN 03 2018 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions ofTitle 10, ofthe 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 oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 12 December 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
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 ofactive duty on 24 August 1965. On 19 August 
1966, you made a statement to a special agent in which you admitted to homosexual involvement 
with the Executive Officer (XO) and a CS3. Specifically, you admitted engaging in several acts 
of sodomy and one act ofsex with the XO and kissing and sodomy with the CS3. All acts were 
performed aboard your naval vessel. Subsequently, you submitted your resignation for the good 
ofthe service and to escape trial by court-martial. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, 
you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised ofyour rights, and warned ofthe 
probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request for discharge was 
granted and on 11 October 1966, you received an OTH discharge in lieu oftrial by court-martial. 
As a result ofthis action, you were spared the stigma ofa court-martial conviction and the 
potential penalties ofa punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. 

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. The 
Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors and your desire to upgrade your discharge to honorable pursuant to the Don't 
Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of2010. The Board also considered your contentions that you were 
romantically pursued by the XO and had served honorably during your time spent in the 
Republic ofVietnam on the inland waterways. The Board concluded these factors were not 
sufficient to warrant re-characterization ofyour discharge given the serious and repetitive nature 
ofyour misconduct. Under the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of2010, and the Under 
Secretary ofDefense Memo of20 September 2011 (Correction ofmilitary records following 
repeal of IO 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 and the evidence you provided, the Board noted 
your record does not contain any documentation to support your contentions. Additionally, the 
Board determined aggravating factors existed. Specifically, the Board noted you admitted 
kissing the CS3 on the ship in public view and moving to another location on the ship when you 
were seen by other sailors together. The Board also noted you received money and gifts from the 
XO. Further, the Board noted you admitted to sexual misconduct aboard your ship which is not 
permitted regardless ofgender. Lastly, the Board believed that considerable clemency was 
extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. 
The Board concluded that you received the benefit ofyour bargain with the Navy when your 
request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director