DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

CRS
Docket No: 4603-01
13 May 2002

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.

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.
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
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
and policies.
opinion furnished by the Specialty Advisor to the Surgeon General
for Psychiatry dated 21 August 2001,
The Board also considered the decisional document prepared by the
Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), after your personal
appearance before NDRB on 14 November 2000.

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.
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion,
and with the first four conclusions set forth on pages 7 and 8 of
NDRB's decisional document.
been denied.
will be furnished upon request.

The names and votes of the members of the panel

In this connection, the Board substantially

Accordingly, your application has

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

2

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY

NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER

PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA 

23708-2197

6520
0506: SLB-0890
21 AUG 01

From:
To:

Subj:

Case Reviewers
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records,
Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C. 20370-2179

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE
OF FORMER GMG3
B

USN, 

Ref:

(a) Your letter of 03 JUL 01

Encl:

(1) BCNR file
(2) Service Record
(3) Medical Record

Pursuant to reference (a),

a review of enclosures (1) through
1.
(3) was conducted to form opinions about subject petitioner's claim
that he suffered with a bipolar
military service,
misconduct which led to his discharge.

and that it significantly contributed to the

disorder during his period of

2.

Facts of the case:

The service member did not endorse any depression or
worry,

(a)
excessive
sleeping, or nervous trouble of any sort on the SF-93 during his
enlistment physical on 26 Feb 81 or during his re-enlistment
physical on 29 Jan 85.

loss of memory or amnesia,

frequent trouble

(b) The service member did report

worry" and "nervous trouble of any sort"
discharge physical
examiner, LT
family and work issues in the past.
not recommended,

on 01 APR 86.

"depression or excessive
on the SF-93 during his
ascribed by the

This was

MC, USNR, to being overly concerned with
A psychiatric evaluation was

and no psychiatric diagnosis was made.

In a Narrative Summary dated 06 Jun 84 from the Alcohol

Rehabilitation Center, Norfolk, Dr.-, the General Medical
Officer
to ARC,
Dependence, in remission.

diagnosed

assigned

member

the

with Alcohol

The member failed to adhere to   aftercare as recommended
ARD, and did not participate in

by Dr Moreci at his discharge from  
treatment with Antabuse,

as recommended by Dr Moreci.

The member had multiple

 

NJP's,

dating

to the very

earliest days of his enlistment (the first in September,
failure to
unauthorized

disobeying orders,

absence,

 

1981) for
complete

(c)

(d)

(e)

maintenance,

and drunk and disorderly conduct,

among

assigned
others.
(f)

 

member

(g)

In 

The member was found to be emotionally stable and fit to

handle explosives on three separate evaluations from August, 1982
to July, 1985.

reported

that

the

had significant

Dr.,- letter dated 12

Dee 00, he
described the   member,  as having been exposed to a disruptive home
environment and to maladaptive behavioral patterns in his youth. He
and
also
He described a family
disciplinary problems during high school.
history of depression and drug abuse and a pattern of drug and
alcohol use by the patient in high school to control mood swings
and behavioral problems.
member
hospitalization,
psychiatric symptoms.
described a pattern of behavior consistent with bipolar disorder
prior to entry into the Navy.
performed by Dr.
disorder, substance abuse, and a personality disorder.

psychiatric problems leading to
and required multiple medications to manage his
He also reported that the member's family

Madsen supported diagnoses of schizoaffective

After his separation from the navy, the

Psychological testing of the member

experienced

recurrent

academic

3.

The following opinions are submitted:
(a)

The available documentation,

which does not include any
from prior to or during his enlistment, is

psychiatric evaluations
not sufficient to support conclusively that the member suffered
from bipolar disorder during his enlistment.
supplied by  
Disorder,
enlistment, and his disruptive upbringing, strongly suggest that a
personality disorder may have been a major contributor to his
symptomatology.

Dr'Bs strongly suggestive of a Major Mood
the patient's behavioral patterns prior to and during

While the history

(b) There is no evidence that the member was unduly

influenced by his mental
misconduct which led to his discharge.

state at the time he engaged in the

Recommendation: Based on review of the provided documentation,
4.
there is insufficient evidence to justify a change in the character
of the member's discharge from the United States Navy.

This review was conducted by  

5.
supervision of CD

Lm? MC USNR under the
MC USN, staff psychiatrist.

LT MC

USNR

LCDR MC USN

2