DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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


Docket No. 6324-18 
Ref: Signature Date 



Dear 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. 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. 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 case on its merits. A three-member 
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 11 April 2019. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable 
statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in April 1989. After 
injuring your left knee in July 1989, you underwent arthroscopic surgery to your knee on 1 
September 1989. On 30 October 1989, you admitted to using marijuana, Lysergic acid 
diethylamide, and amphetamines thousands of time prior to entering the Navy along with 
hospitalization for drug rehabilitation. In addition, you also admitted to a preservice history of 
larceny and other juvenile crimes that were adjudicated in civilian court. Based on your failure 
to disclose your preservice misconduct and hospitalization, you were notified of administrative 
separation processing for fraudulent entry on 12 December 1989. After being medically cleared 
for separation on 15 December 1989, you were discharged for fraudulent entry with a General 
characterization of service. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve an upgrade to your 
characterization of service and a change to your narrative reason for separation to disability. 
You assert that you fabricated your pre-service misconduct to avoid harassment you were 
receiving due to your knee condition and have since undergone several knee surgeries to treat the 
condition. In addition, you raise your post-discharge good character as mitigation. 
Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board found 
insufficient evidence that you were unfit for continued naval service due to your knee condition 
at the time of your discharge from the Navy. As pointed out earlier, you were medically 
screened on 15 December 1989 and cleared for separation. In the Board’s opinion this was 
evidence you were fit for continued naval service at the time of your discharge. Second, if the 
Board were to believe your version of events, you engineered your early release from your 
enlistment contract by falsifying an official statement to a Navy investigator. Regardless of your 
intent, the Board felt you should not be rewarded for your misconduct by receiving an upgrade to 
your characterization of service or a change to your narrative reason for separation. Third, the 
Board found no evidence to support your assertion you were being harassed and, regardless, 
concluded the harassment you described was not a reasonable basis for committing misconduct 
to avoid your enlistment obligation. Fourth, the Board found your statement to the investigator 
credible based on the specificity in which you described your misconduct that formed the basis 
for your fraudulent entry discharge. Therefore, they determined you were properly discharged 
by the Navy for fraudulent entry. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or 
injustice to warrant a change to your record. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

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 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, 

4/24/2019