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 the entire record, 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 application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 27 May 1992.  On 4 June 1992, you received a mental health evaluation which diagnosed you with a severe adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features and histrionic personality traits.  The evaluation noted that you revealed a strong desire for separation from the Navy, with no evidence of delusions, hallucinations, gross psychotic features nor phobias.  As a result, you were recommended for an entry-level separation.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of entry-level performance/conduct.  After you waived your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended an uncharacterized discharge due to entry-level performance/conduct.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an entry-level separation due to entry-level performance/conduct.  On 19 June 1992, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that, while on medical hold, your command purposely prolonged your discharge; and you were told if you signed your discharge papers stating the Navy was not responsible for your injuries, you would be released quickly.  The Board also noted your contentions that you were told to sign any type of discharge papers the Navy gave you in order to be released from active duty and you did not realize that an uncharacterized discharge would prevent you from using the Montgomery GI Bill (GI Bill).  However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization of service. 
 
In regard to your contentions that while on medical hold, your command purposely prolonged your discharge and you were told if you signed your discharge papers stating the Navy was not responsible for your injuries, you would be released quickly, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions.  In regard to your contention that you were told to sign any type of discharge papers the Navy gave you in order to be released from active duty, the Board also noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  Regarding your contention that you did not realize that an uncharacterized discharge would prevent you from using the GI Bill, the Board noted that in order for you to be eligible for GI Bill benefits, you would have had to serve 30 months of a 4-year active duty obligation.  The Board also noted that you were notified of your separation processing within 180 days of the beginning of your period of active service.  Applicable regulations authorize an uncharacterized entry-level separation if the processing of an individual’s separation begins within 180 days of the individual’s entry on active service.  The Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in your discharge that warrants an upgrade in the characterization of your service. 
 
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 the 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.