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

  CRS
									  Docket No: 6566-07 
                                              29 February 2008

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 21 February 2008. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 4 September 1980. You were honorably discharged by reason of homosexuality on 26 July 1983 based on your admission to your commanding officer that you were a homosexual. You were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.

The Board did not accept your contentions to the effect that the reason for your discharge should be changed because you are not a homosexual, and that you want to join the National Guard. It is apparent that you lied in 1983 in order to effect your discharge, or you lied in your application for correction of your naval record in order to facilitate your enlistment in the National Guard. No relief is warranted in either case.

As directives in effect in 1983 required the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to a Sailor discharged for homosexuality, and as you have not demonstrated that it would be in the interest of justice for the Board to assign you a more favorable code as an exception to policy, there is no basis for granting your request for an amended reenlistment code.
In view of the foregoing, 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,

	W. DEAN PFEIFFER
					Executive Director