DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 9500-02
29 August 2003

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 26 August 2003. 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.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 19 July 2001 at age 18. About four months later, on 30 November 2001, you were diagnosed with chronic post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which existed prior to your enlistment. At that time you were advised to report to an emergency room if you experienced any suicidal, homicidal, or self-mutilation ideation.

On 20 December 2001, you were referred to a medical health unit (MHU) due to your reports of thoughts of harming yourself. At that time you were strongly recommended for expeditious separation from the Navy. The MHU report stated, that you had received outpatient counselling from ages 9 to 16, and had been hospitalized for psychiatric treatment at age 11. The report then stated, in part, as follows:

Diagnosed:  PTSD, immature, borderline personality disorder with passive aggressive features.... (Member) presented to the emergency room stating that he had thoughts of harming himself and felt that if he returned to his command he would definitely harm himself..., at a follow-up examination he stated that he wanted out of the Navy because he could not handle pressure..., in addition to a diagnosis of PTSD, he is immature and has features of a borderline personality disorder a passive aggressive personality disorder.... (his) condition is not only incompatible with being hospital corpsman, but incompatible with service in the Navy.... (there is) a high likelihood that if he is retained, he will continue to engage in suicidal and self-destructive behavior..., recommend an entry level separation.

On 11 January 2001 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of fraudulent entry due to the diagnosed PTSD and personality disorder, which existed prior to your enlistment. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to submit a statement in rebuttal to the aforementioned notification.

On 15 January 2001 your commanding officer recommended you be separated from the Navy with an entry level separation by reason of fraudulent entry. This recommendation was approved and on 29 January 2001 you were so separated and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as you youth and immaturity and your contention that you were eligible to perform your duties and any other function assigned by the military and should be allowed to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code. The Board concluded that your diagnosis and type of discharge were sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Such a code is normally assigned to individuals who are separated due to their failure to complete recruit training. 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