Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAW ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

ELP
Docket No. 7033-98
24 March 1999

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 17 March 1999.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
provided by the Department of Psychiatry, Naval Medical Center,
San Diego, CA, dated 6 January 1966, a copy of which is attached.

The board also considered the advisory opinion

Your allegations of error and

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.

The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 13 November
1992 for three years as an SK3 (E-4).
reenlistment, you had completed more than three years of prior
active service.

At the time of your

The record reflects that you served without incident until 12 May
1995 when you were assigned to a transient personnel unit due to
spousal abuse substantiated by the Family Advocacy Center (FAC).
On 18 May 1995, you were referred to the mental health unit by
the FAC for a diagnostic work-up to rule out a personality
disorder and because of your repetitive threats to commit
suicide.
told the examining psychiatrist that after consulting with
counsel, you refused to participate in the psychiatric evaluation
or answer any questions.

You reported for your appointment on 8 June 1995 and

You were described as only

On 30 June 1995, you reported for a psychiatric evaluation at the
request of the FAC to determine your amenability for treatment by
the Family Advocacy Program.
superficially cooperative in the interview.
medical care noted that a temporary restraining order had been
issued because of violent behavior such as dragging your pregnant
wife up and down the stairs for two hours; slapping and choking
her; physically and verbally abusing her for the past three
years; punching and twisting her wrists; and inflicting other
painful injuries to her arms, ribs, and legs.
alleged that you had recently thrown your wife around, choked her
while she was holding your baby, and tried to stuff a condom in
her mouth accusing her of infidelity.

The record of

It was also

You initially denied any violence toward your wife but later said
I'm not going to stand there
"I don't call it domestic violence,
and let any woman strike at  
wife down, bruising her arms and legs,
times, pushing her onto a bed and punching her once or twice.

You did admit to holding your

slapping her three or four

me."

The consultation summary noted that you reported a history of
truancy in high school, sexual promiscuity, venereal disease,
The examining
shoplifting, lying, cheating, and vandalism.
psychiatrist noted an arrest record which included pulling a fire
alarm at age 16 and driving under the influence of alcohol four
years ago.

The examining psychiatrist reviewed your health record and noted
you had been admitted in September 1990 after a suicidal gesture.
The evaluator commented on a past suicidal gesture evidenced by a
‘slash to the abdomen" which resulted in a psychiatric admission
to a civilian hospital.
Your more recent suicidal thoughts were
because you wanted to get off your ship and be discharged from
In this regard, your said that you left your division
the Navy.
officer a note, telling him to get you off the ship or you were
going to kill yourself.
that at the time of your first enlistment you informed personnel
at the examining station of a prior psychiatric history but
failed to disclose it on your medical history and denied any
psychiatric problems or treatment.

The examining psychiatrist further noted

You showed no remorse or empathy for your actions.

The psychiatrist stated that a restraint team was standing by
during the interview because of your intimidating and angry
demeanor.
The psychiatrist stated that when recommendations were made, you
stated
0ut.N
possible administrative separation processing you stated  
crazy, I can't believe I'm here.

"the Navy just wants people to look real bad, to kick them
You refused psychological testing and when advised of

"I'm not
If they want, we can make a big

2

ordeal. They would have to prove it.
attorney."
files because they it contained privileged information.

I'll hire a civilian
You were advised that you could not view the FAC

unspecified personality
You were then diagnosed with a severe,
disorder with anti-social, narcissistic, and sadistic features.
The psychiatrist recommended that you be considered for an
expeditious discharge due to personality disorder since you posed
an ongoing risk to yourself and especially to your spouse.

On 19 July 1995, you were notified that discharge was being
considered by reason of convenience of the government due to a
personality disorder.
rights, declined to consult with counsel, and waived your right
to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
authority approved separation and you were honorably discharged
on 2 August 1995 and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

You were advised of your procedural

The discharge

However, no justification for such changes
The Board noted that you request reinstatement

In its review of your application, the Board conducted a careful
search of your service record for any mitigating factor which
might warrant changing the reason for your discharge or the
reenlistment code.
could be found.
with back pay and compensatory damages in the amount of one
million dollars, and contend that you were involuntarily
discharged and unfairly labeled as having a personality disorder.
The Board also noted the statement provided by a psychiatrist
from the Department of Veterans Affairs which states that based
on his interview with you,
sufficient evidence to confirm a specific personality disorder.
The Board further noted the letters denying you employment, the
court order modifying the restraining order and child support,
and your rebuttal to the advisory opinion.
You claim that both
the psychiatrist at the time of your discharge and the author of
the advisory opinion mentioned untruthful domestic violence
incidents in their reports.
You assert that you were never
arrested for drawing a firearm or had a history of truancy in
high school.
opinion quoted from the psychiatrist's handwritten evaluation
that you were arrested for drawing a firearm, when the report
actually stated "pulling a fire alarm."
The Board could not
determine where the psychiatrist obtained this information.

The Board did note that the author of the advisory

he could not conclude there was

Despite your contentions to the contrary,
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
In this regard, the Board notes that the psychiatric evaluation
was a comprehensive assessment based on information reported by
the 
FAC's psychologist, available medical records, you own
personal history, and your mental status at the time of the
interview.

The information in this evaluation was based, for the

the Board substantially

3

Psychiatrists, in the

most part, on information you provided.
Board's experience, do not write fiction, but very diligently
The DVA psychiatrist,
document what a patient reports to them.
upon which you rely, also bases his opinion on what you reported
to him.
Further, the DVA psychiatrist did not see you under the
same stressful conditions that clearly existed when you were
observed and evaluated by the Navy psychiatrist.
The Board
believes there is sufficient evidence to conclude that you have a
personality disorder.
It is incumbent upon you to show that the
Navy's diagnosis was invalid or erroneous.
the satisfaction of the Board that the reason for your discharge
should be changed.

You have not shown to

Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals who are discharged by reason of a personality
disorder.
Since the evidence of record indicates that you posed
a risk for harm to yourself and especially to your wife, the
Board concluded that the reenlistment code was proper and no
change is warranted.

Once an individual's enlistment has expired, there is no basis
for reinstatement, let alone in a pay grade to which he or she
was never promoted.
Neither the Board nor the Secretary of the
Navy has authority to compensate an individual for damages. Any
claim for damages must be pursued through a federal court of
competent jurisdiction.

Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

The names and

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

DEPARTMENTOFPSYCHIATRY

NAVALMEDICALCENTER
SANDIEGO, 

CA92134-5000

6JAN99

To:

Chainnan,Board  for Corrections 
DepartmentoftheNavy,  Washington,DC 20370-5100

ofNaval Records

Subj.: Comments and recommendations regarding the  requestforcorrection 
case of fortne

ofNaval records in the 

\

Ref.:

(a)DocketNo:  

7033-98

Encl.: 

(1)BCNR File
(2)Enlisted microfiche service record

(a)requested  a psychiatric specialty review of

1. Reference 
ofPersonality  Disorder removed from his record  and to be re-instated as an SK3 with back  pay and
compensatory damages. I have reviewed the  enclosures and offer the  following comments.

request to have the  diagnosis

2. The only medical record 
a psychiatrist at NAVSTA  San Diego 

available,apsychiatric  evaluation done on 30 JUN 95 by
atthattime,  provides the following information:

- The member was referred  for psychiatric evaluation 
order to determine 
Family Advocacytreatmentprogram for spouse abuse.

bytheNavy  Family Advocacy agency in
ifhe was a danger to himselfor others and to assess his amenability to the

- Thememberhad  
severe impulse  control problems  and statements made by him which indicated a significant
potential for violence.

beenreferredtoFamilyAdvocacybyhiscommandoutofconcernabouthis

- Thememberendorsed holdinghiswife down and causing bruises  onheranns and legs,
slapping her three or four times, pushing her onto  a bed,and punching her once or twice.

- The evaluation refers to a Family Advocacy 
by the member toward  his wife.

investigationthathad  substantiated physical abuse

- The memberendorsedthe existence ofatemporary restraining  order initiated by his wife
against himselfaboutwhich  he 

stated,“1  break it every day."

- The evaluation refers to  allegations ofsignificant abuse by the member toward
including an incident where  he allegedly choked her andtriedto 

 his wife,

stuffa condom down her throat.

- The evaluation describes a history of repeated suicide threats and includes reference to
documentation in the form of several letters the member had written in which he admitted to
physically abusing his spouse and threatened to kill her and himself.

- The evaluation refers to the members medical record which documents that he was admitted to
a Navy psychiatry ward in September 1990 for suicidal ideation and notes his endorsement of a
pre-enlistment psychiatric admission for a self-inflicted knife wound to his chest and abdomen in
the context of suicidality, which he denied during his pre-enlistment evaluation.

-The member endorsed a history of truancy from highschool, having eight or nine physical
altercations, impregnating a 23 year-old woman when he has age
with 100 women. The evaluation makes reference to his medical record showing documentation
of numerous treatments for nonspecific urethritis and gonorrhea.

18,  and being sexually active

 

- The psychiatric evaluation makes reference to the member
numerous treatments for minor injuries related to alcohol intoxication.

’s medical record indicating

- There is also a reference to his arrest record including arrests for drawing a firearm and driving
under the influence.

3. The psychiatric evaluation describes the member as showing lack of remorse for violence toward his
wife and concluded that he was not amenable to Family Advocacy treatment for spouse abuse due to his
lack of remorse, sadism, and unwillingness to cooperate with treatment.

4. A review of his service record indicates the following:

-The member received counseling for alcohol-related incidents.

- The member received charges for violating the UC
Article 14: Drunk Driving in October 1991.

M J Article 95: Escape from Custody and

- The member was sent to Anger Management classes following an altercation with his LPO.

5. A review of the letter fro
7 JAN 98 indicates the following.

D, staff psychiatrist at the VAMC La Jolla California dated

btained an office appointment with Dr. Flood for the purpose of re-evaluating his

psychiatric diagnosis.

tated to 

Dr .-at some of the information in the Navy psychiatric evaluation

from June 1995 was inaccurate and exaggerated.

a
statements recorded in the June 1995 evaluation.

hat he had a history of physical altercations with his wife or
striking his wife three times. This material contradicts his

denied to D
any thefts or ever been arr
1995 record.

at he had ever had any disciplinary problems, participated in
is material contradicts his statements recorded in the June

attributed his previous behavior to his immaturity and stated that he is a different

person now.

Dr’eports  th

6. 
Personality Disorder diagnosis ’,
or mixed personality disorder. ”

displayed behaviors that “could be construed as criteria for a

ut  concluded that there was “not enough evidence to confirm a specific

s clearly unsuitable for Naval service. He would not have been allowed to enlist in
e had been honest about his psychiatric treatment prior to his servi
and re-enlistment code seem proper. While it may be of some debate whether or not
displayed character traits of sadism or narcissism, material in the records which are available for review
clearly supports a history of Conduct Disorder as an adolescent and traits consistent with Antisocial
Personality and Borderline Personality. I see no reason to change the characterization of his discharge.

rge

_R

STAFF 

PSYCHIATRtST