Docket No: 6852-19 
Ref: Signature Date 
  
  
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 9 September 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, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
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. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 27 February 1984.  On 2 November 1983, you completed and signed an application for medical processing (DD Form 2246) and failed to disclose your previous mental health history.  On 24 February 1984, you completed and signed a report of medical history (Standard Form 93) and failed to disclose your previous mental health history. 

On 27 February 1984, you completed and signed an application for enlistment (DD Form 1966) and failed to disclose your previous mental health history.  On 18 April 1985, a background investigation discovered that you had been admitted to mental hospitals as both an inpatient and outpatient on several occasions.  
The investigation revealed that you received inpatient treatment from 1 September 1982 to 11 February 1983, and from 12 to 16 May 1983, at a mental hospital in , .  You later received inpatient treatment at a mental hospital in , , from 14 July to 12 August 1983.  As a result of this discovery, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of having enlisted in error.  After electing to waive your rights, your commanding officer (CO) forwarded your case to the separation authority recommending discharge with an honorable characterization of service by reason of enlisted in error.  The separation authority approved your CO’s recommendation and directed an honorable discharge and a narrative reason as “enlisted in error.”  On 10 January 1986, you were discharged.  
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to change your narrative reason for separation and contention that after your second wife died, a flag officer refused to give you a copy of your wife’s photo, and that you were seated as a Superior Court Judge of the United States Senate Judicial Committee on Ethical Behavior.  The Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions.  The Board ultimately concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief given your failure to disclose your previous mental health history. 
   
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,