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 July 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 May 2012.  You were cleared for enlistment in the Navy on September 2011 despite noting on your enlistment physical that you stuttered “off and on.”  On July 2012, you were diagnosed with stuttering and recommended for administrative separation.  You were notified of administrative separation processing on August 2012 for erroneous enlistment and were discharged with an uncharacterized entry level separation on August 2012 for failure to meet physical procurement standards.

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative 
reason for separation to disability and an Honorable characterization of service. You assert that 
you were hurt and depressed due to the Navy’s decision to discharge you for a childhood speech 
impediment. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board 
concluded you did not possess a qualifying disability condition to support a change to your 
narrative reason for separation to disability. Stuttering is defined as a condition not a disability 
by the Secretary of Defense since it is considered a developmental condition. Therefore, the 
disability regulations do not consider it a qualifying disability for Disability Evaluation System 
purposes. Based on the fact your condition preexisted your entry into the Navy and does not 
qualify as a disability condition, the Board concluded you were properly discharged for 
erroneous enlistment due to meet physical procurement standards. Second, the Board also 
concluded you were properly issued an uncharacterized entry-level separation. Navy regulations 
require the issuance of uncharacterized entry level separations if a service member is discharged 
in their first 180 days of consecutive active duty. Since you were discharged in the first 180 days 
of active duty, you do not qualify for a characterized discharge without a finding by the 
Secretary of the Navy that exceptional circumstances exist. Despite your stated unhappiness 
with the Navy’s decision to separate you, the Board did not find any exceptional circumstance in 
your case to merit an exception to policy in your case since it is not unusual for service members 
to be upset about being involuntarily separated so quickly after an enlistment. Accordingly, the 
Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your 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. 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.