DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 1087-01
20 July 2001
Dear
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 Navy Records,
sitting in executive session,
2001.
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
material considered by the Board consisted of your application,
together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes,
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in
considered your application on
Documentary
regulations and policies.
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 enlisted in the Navy on 13 November 1995
for four years at age 18.
conducted prior to enlistment indicated that recruiting
authorities were aware of your history of sexual abuse as a child
and treatment at a family counseling center.
The report of medical examination
You disclosed that you had been the victim of sexual
On 15 November 1995 you were referred to the mental health unit
as a result of information obtained during the first week of
training.
abuse at age 7 by your step-father's daughter and that for
several months you had been consistently depressed with disturbed
appetite, increased sleep, low energy, low self-esteem, poor
concentration and feelings of hopelessness.
with an unspecified depressive disorder which existed prior to
enlistment and considered to be a potential danger to yourself
and others if retained.
You were diagnosed
On 16 November 1995 you were notified that an entry level
separation was being considered by reason of defective enlistment
and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by the
diagnosed depressive disorder.
procedural rights, declined to consult with legal counsel or
You were advised of your
submit a statement in your own behalf,
have your case reviewed by the general court-martial convening
Thereafter, the discharge authority directed an
authority.
uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of erroneous
entry.
an RE-4 reenlistment code.
You were so discharged on 27 November 1995 and assigned
and waived the right to
Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment.
Board noted your contention that you told a Navy doctor that you
were upset and saddened because you were unable to be with an
aunt whose health had suddenly deteriorated.
after seeing the doctor, you were discharged and were able to be
with your aunt before she passed away.
your mother's statement and that of a licensed social worker that
you do not suffer from a bipolar disorder.
You stated that
The Board also considered
The
The social
Further, you were diagnosed with an unspecified
The Board notes that the consultation report on file in your
record does not mention that you were upset over your aunt's
health.
depressive disorder and not a bipolar disorder.
worker's statement indicates that you told him the Navy
psychiatrist made the foregoing diagnosis to assist you so you
could be with a dying relative.
determine what your true statement is, the one you are making
now, or the one you made to extricate yourself from your military
commitment.
In any case, the record indicates you were treated
for emotional problems prior to service and provided Navy medical
authority a strong basis for finding your retention to not be in
the best interests of the Navy.
The Board thus concluded that
the assigned reenlistment code was proper and no change is
warranted. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
The Board found it difficult to
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken.
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.
You are entitled to have the
.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07494-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board carefully considered the medical evidence you submitted in support of your application but found it insufficient to warrant corrective action in your case. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07974-97
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 1993. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. After an evaluation, the diagnosis was personality." The Board also noted the comments by the CO in which he stated that you attempted suicide in 1987 and again in 1990, and on 16 April 1992 you stated that you were going to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07329-02
supports a diagnosis of a personality disorder. documents (sustained irritability, paranoia, not mixing well with people) are seen in personality disorders, including the one (Avoidant Personality Disorder) with which the Navy psychiatrists diagnosed this patient. A condition * The symptoms documented in the mental health assessments 3. meet DSM-IV criteria for a personality disorder -- see Reference The symptoms documented do not meet DSM-IV criteria for (c) either manic, hypomanic, major...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2001-091
The applicant stated that a Naval psychiatrist, who evaluated him in 199X at the request of the Coast Guard, supports his allegation that his Bipolar disease was incurred on and aggravated by his Coast Guard active duty service. He stated that the applicant needed to be "medically boarded from the Coast Guard" and recommended a medical board, which should have occurred while the applicant was on active duty. In recent statements on behalf of the applicant, CDR H (the flight surgeon), as...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 1997-092
However, Dr. x, Dr. x, and Dr. x, Coast Guard doctors who examined the applicant many times in 199x and 199x, diagnosed him as having both a personality disorder and a depressive mood disorder. Dr. x diagnosed him as having both dysthymia (a depressive mood disorder) and a personality disorder. Therefore, the Board finds that, at the time of his discharge, the applicant had recently been diagnosed by Coast Guard medical personnel with both (a) a depressive mood disorder (dysthymia), which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05443-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2006-055
Upon the applicant’s discharge from the hospital on July 30, 2002, Dr. N, a psy- chiatrist, diagnosed him with an Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, as well as a Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, but with Cluster B Traits.3 Dr. N reported that the applicant had no mental disease, defect, or derangement and was “capable of distinguishing right from wrong and adhering to the right. Upon admission to the hospital on July 24, 2002, a psychologist interviewed the applicant and...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501203
ND05-01203 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050713. I feel that “no waiver for psych “ had a direct impact on the reason for my Discharge as Erroneous Enlistment. SR is suitable to report to Separations Division.021213: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by a borderline personality disorder.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07033-98
- 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. A review of his service record indicates the following: -The member received counseling for alcohol-related incidents. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00514-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2002. You were so discharged on 24 April 2000. Reglations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individual separated by reason erroneous enlistment.