DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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


Docket No. 11132-18 
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 30 May 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 on 16 September 
1983. On 26 September 1983, an examination revealed you suffered from a right foot deformity 
that was causing you pain while running and marching. On 1 November 1983, a medical board 
diagnosed you with Talipes Equinocavus Varus deformity (clubfoot) and concluded you did not 
meet entry standards. You were recommended for administrative separation for erroneous 
enlistment despite your rebuttal statement in which you stated your belief that you were able to 
perform your military duties. On 17 November 1983, you were discharged for erroneous 
enlistment with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability discharge with an 
Honorable characterization of service. You assert that you were told that you would receive an 
Honorable disability discharge in 1983. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale 
for relief. First, the Board determined your narrative reason for separation is correct. You were 
erroneously enlisted in the Navy despite possessing a condition that disqualified you from 
meeting entry standards, i.e. your clubfoot. In the Board’s opinion, this qualified you for an 
erroneous enlistment separation for the convenience of the government. Since you were enlisted 
in error, you did not qualify for referral to the Disability Evaluation System or disability benefits 
for your preexisting condition. Second, the Board also concluded you were appropriately 
assigned an uncharacterized entry-level separation. Service regulations direct the issuance of 
uncharacterized entry-level separation for service members in their first 180 days of continuous 
active service. Since you were in your first 180 days of active service when administrative 
separation proceedings were initiated against you, the Board found that your assigned 
uncharacterized entry-level separation is correct. While there are exceptions to this rule, the 
Board found you did not meet any of the exceptions to warrant the issuance of a characterized 
discharge. Specifically, they found no exceptional circumstances surrounding your performance 
or conduct that would merit consideration of an exception to policy. Accordingly, the Board 
determined insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your 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, 

6/4/2019