Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02685-98
Original file (02685-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Y

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 203704100

JRE
Docket No: 2685-98
25 May 1999

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 20 may 1999. 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, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by designees of the Specialty Advisor for Psychiatry dated 2 April 1999, a
copy of which is attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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
and material evidence or other matter 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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY
NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER
SAN DIEGO, CA 92 134-5000

02 APR 99

From:
To:

LT, MC, USNR

Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records,
Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C. 20370-5 100

Subj: APPLICA
FORMER

Ref

(a) 10 U. S. C. 1552, Docket 

#2685-98

Encl:

(1) BCNR File
(2) Medical Health Record

IN THE CASE OF

1.

Per your request and in accordance with ref (a), 

I have reviewed enclosures (1) and (2).

The service member received an Administrative Separation from the United States Navy for

1. The ex-service member contends that he was suffering

2.
Schizotypal Personality Disorder on 22 FEB 199  
from a schizophrenic disorder at that time.

In review of both the service record as well as the medical record, a definitive diagnosis of
4.
psychiatric evaluation with
a “schizophrenic disorder ” can not be diagnosed.
psychological testing, indicates no overt positive symptoms of a psychotic process, specifically, no
formal thought disorder, no specific hallucinatory processes, no catatonic behavior and no
disorganized speech or behavior documented. The medical record supports these findings with
documentation verifying an absence of auditory
significance is the absence of any documentation that the ex-service member was unable to function
in his various tasks. After each of the documented medical evaluations, the ex-service member was
returned to his prior duty status. This is not indicative of any decline in functioning.
Physical
1, 1990, and 1986 make
Examinations with complete review of system questionnaires dated in 199 
no mention of any psychotic nor psychiatric
 
symptqms other than  “anxiety” reported in 1990.
26MAY89 that has been altered to the point that several
Mention should be made to an entry dated 
lines can not be deciphered.

 or visual hallucinations  

(19JAN1990). Also of

in the Phillippines on 14 MAY 1997, his multiple presentations during

Despite the fact that the patient may have presented himself as psychotic at the time of

5.
evaluation by Dr.
his time on active duty military service appeared to be no more than a spectrum of schizotypal
personality disorder leading to possible  
mention, nor evidence ruling out a possible alternate etiology of his presentation on 14 MAY 1997,
such as a toxicology screen  nor a complete medical evaluation. Any number of circumstances may
have contributed to the ex-service member ’s presentation nearly one month after his discharge.

prodrome psychotic symptoms. In addition, there is no

Recommendation: After thorough evaluation of the provided data, there is no sufficient

6.
evidence to warrant a change in the characterization of the discharge.

LT, MC, USNR
Resident in Psychiatry

MtC, USNR

CAPT,
Staff Psychiatrist

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01732-02

    Original file (01732-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, and the record of the two previous reviews of your application by the Board. In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which is attached. An SNMHAS record entry dated 12 August 1987 indicates...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02561-98

    Original file (02561-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) granted you service connection for post traumatic stress disorder in 1997, effective from 23 August 1994, was not considered probative of error or injustice in your naval record. prior to your discharge were related to a personality disorder, which is a condition not covered by the military disability evaluation system, rather than a physical disability. It appears likely that the diagnosis made with all information would be PTSD and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9808154

    Original file (NC9808154.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 1999. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your frequent misconduct and especially the final 243 day period of unauthorized absence. I see no evidence to show that (his) bad conduct discharge whole on active duty (was) in any way related to psychiatric symptomology.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04603-01

    Original file (04603-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. The following...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 13_34_15 CST 2001

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. He noted that He The Board specifically noted In its review of your application the Board conducted a thorough review of both service and medical records, and the post-service medical records you provided. The Board also could not ignore the multiple notations With regard to your psychiatrist’s opinion that you suffered from PTSD, a paranoid personality disorder and a possible organic brain syndrome, the Board noted that like the other...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 14_01_05 CST 2001

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. He noted that He The Board specifically noted In its review of your application the Board conducted a thorough review of both service and medical records, and the post-service medical records you provided. The Board also could not ignore the multiple notations With regard to your psychiatrist’s opinion that you suffered from PTSD, a paranoid personality disorder and a possible organic brain syndrome, the Board noted that like the other...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03842-01

    Original file (03842-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no documentation of symptoms of depression, alcohol abuse, or any other psychiatric disorder. It is unlikely that symptoms of a post-traumatic stress disorder or major depressive disorder would have "caused or significantly contributed to the misconduct of record." In summary, it does not appear that this individual's diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder were symptomatic during his period of service.

  • CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 1997-115

    Original file (1997-115.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His diagnoses on discharge were reported as follows: “1. VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On August 18, 1999, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board deny the applicant the requested relief. 1995), indicates that the Commandant’s decision was justified because the applicant “was not treated or rated for [paranoid schizophrenia] while serving on active duty.” The Chief Counsel also stated that the apparent contradiction between the VA’s findings and those of the Coast Guard...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08655-00

    Original file (08655-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Petitioner was impatient with Med Hold and the Mental Health Department, stating once more that he felt the Navy was the cause of his psychological problems. Diagnosed with “Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood (resolved); Marital Problem; Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, with Antisocial and Narcissistic traits psychiatrically fit for full duty and accountable/responsible for his actions. In the petitioner ’s letter requesting a change in status of his discharge, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00999-05

    Original file (00999-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It rejected the unsubstantiated opinion of your forensic psychiatrist that you lacked mental responsibility when you committed the offense that resulted in your discharge, as well as when you requested discharge in lieu of trial by general court-martial for desertion and disobedience of an order.The Board did not concur with the conclusion of the designees of the Specialty Leader for Psychiatry that your mental disorder was aggravated by your naval service. Consequently, when applying for a...