DEPARTMENT OF'THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON. VA 2220+2490 
Docket No. 5514-15 
HAY 2 0 201& 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 use 1552. 
Although your application was not f i led in a timely manner, the Board found it in the intere st of justice to waive the statute of 
limitations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of N~va~ Records, sitting in 
executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2016 . 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. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in October 2003. On 26 July 2005, you were diagnosed with a personality disorder with anti-·social and borderline features along with dysthymic disorder and a history of polysUbstance abuse. Based on the personality disorder diagnosis, you were discharged on 15 September 2005. Subsequent to your discharge, you were provisionally diagnosed with a bi-polar disorder in 2007 before the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA} confirmed that diagnosis in 2008. The VA medical .examiner noted that i t was more likely than not t hat your 2005 symptoms may have been the beginning of your bi-polar Disorder. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you were improperly diagnosed with a personality disorder instead of a bi-polar disor der.. You contend that if you had been properly diagnosed, you would have been referred through the Disability Evaluation System and placed on the disability retirement list. Unfortunately, the Board di sagreed with your rationale for relief . In reviewing the evidence "in your case, the Board noted that your provisional bi-polar disorder diagnosis surfaced in 2007, approximately t wo y~ars after you were diagnosed by the military with a personality disorder. Despite the VA's opinion that your symptoms more likely than not were the beginning of your bi-polar·disorder, this opinion given several years after your di scharge did not persuade t he Board that you did not have a personality disorder prior to your discharge. The Board felt that many potential intervening factor s could have impacted your mental healt h i n the years in between your discharge and diagnosis for bi­polar disorder. So without substantial evidence that you were suffering from a bi-polar disorder at the time of your discharge, the Board was not incline4 to overrule the Navy mental health providers who observed you and diagnosed your condition at the time of your discharge. Accordingly, the Board was unable to find an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied your application. Your request for a personal appearance before the Board has also been denied. The Board felt i t h.ad sufficient evidence to make a decision in your case and your presence was not required. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon r equest. 

I t is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such t hat favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not pr eviously considered by the Boa.rd prior to making its decision· in this case. · In t his regard, it is import ant 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, 
Executive Director