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

Docket No: 9507-19  
Ref: Signature Date 

This is in reference to your application of 24 September 2019 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 that 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 30 April 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. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 28 February 1969.  On 14 May 1970, you received a mark of 2.8 in Adaptability due to your “lack of maturity to recognize the need to work harder in order succeed in his endeavors.  His NAMTRADET instructors say he made a statement about not believing he should be required to participate in an undeclared war.  He denied making any disloyal statements.”  Next on 1 October 1971, you were assigned a 2.8 in Leadership and Supervisory Ability due to “he tends to be a remonstrant towards the military service in general.” Finally, on 1 October 1972, you received a written warning stating that you were “unable to adapt to the Navy environment.”  The record further notes that you have been “consistently below par,” that you were “too immature at this time to be of service to the Navy,” that your “outspoken criticism of the military and this command positively detract from squadron morale,” and that “[a]s a leader, he creates dissension and rebellion, not cooperating.” You were not recommended for enlistment.  Your final overall trait average was 3.2, which is within the standard for a general discharge during the time of your enlistment.  Your command released you to the Naval Reserve from your active duty obligation three months early, 8 December 1972, with a general characterization of service.  You were released from the Naval Reserve on 27 February 1975, also with a general characterization of service. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contentions, including that you believe the word “General” in your DD Form 214 appears to be placed over a whited out word “Honorable,” that you were never convicted of a military offense, and that you have no understanding of how you could leave the Navy as a rated petty officer and transfer to the reserves with a general discharge.  Upon careful consideration, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service.  The Board noted that your record of performance as set forth in your service records supports the general characterization of service.  The Board also noted that you received a general characterization of service when you completed your time in the Naval Reserve.  Finally, while you state that the DD Form 214 appears altered, the Board relies upon a presumption of regularity in its records.  Absent some evidence that the document were actually altered or that you were entitled to a higher level characterization of discharge, the Board will presume that records are correct. 

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. 

Sincerely, 

5/29/2020