Dear,  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2020.  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 on 1 June 2006 and were counselled for fraudulent entry based on failing to disclose preservice substance abuse.  After reporting to medical on 18 June 2006 with homicidal and suicidal thoughts due to your inability to adjust to the military environment, you were processed for fraudulent entry into the Navy.  On 7 August 2006, you were discharged with an uncharacterized entry level separation for fraudulent entry.  You provided medical records that show you were hospitalized in 2007 and diagnosed with Schizophrenia and a Personality Disorder.   
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability discharge based on your mental breakdown during basic training.  You also assert you never tested positive for use of illegal substances.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.   
 
In reviewing your record, the Board noted that you were immediately counselled for fraudulent entry upon entering the Navy based on a Recruit Quality Assurance Interviewer questionnaire that you completed.  In the Board’s opinion, your admission of preservice drug use supports the Navy’s decision to process you for fraudulent entry since you did not disclose preservice drug use on your enlistment documents.  The fact you did not test positive for any illegal substance was determined not be relevant by the Board since you admitted to preservice drug use as part of the questionnaire and the drug use could have occurred years prior to enlistment.  Since the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that you entered the Navy fraudulently, the Board concluded that you are not entitled to any military disability benefits.  In the Board’s opinion, a service member who enters military service through fraudulent means should not benefit from their fraudulent actions.  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 issues 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.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,