DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 9423-18 Ref: Signature Date Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552. 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. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest 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 Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. A review of your record shows that you enlisted in the delayed entry program on 30 December 1981. While you were awaiting the commencement of active duty, you suffered a psychotic episode that required your hospitalization and were diagnosed with schizophrenia. You entered active duty on 12 May 1982 without disclosing your previous hospitalization and schizophrenia diagnosis. On 9 December 1983, non-judicial punishment was imposed on you for unauthorized absence. You self-referred to mental health on 17 May 1984 expressing your desire to get out of the Navy and were diagnosed with immature personality traits and malingering. You were determined to be psychiatrically fit for full duty and transferred to . Upon arriving to the ship on 18 May 1984, you were immediately seen by medical for an evaluation during which you revealed your prior psychiatric episode, history of marijuana use since age 13, and pre-service history of misconduct including larceny. You were diagnosed with a personality disorder and recommended for administrative separation. You were notified of administrative separation processing due to your personality disorder on 11 June 1984. However, non-judicial punishment was again imposed on you on 12 June 1984 for an orders violation, communicating a threat, and disrespect toward a commissioned officer. On 20 June 1984, Navy Personnel Command approved your discharge for personality disorder and you were discharged on 27 July 1984 with a General characterization of service. Post-discharge, you were hospitalized for your mental health and diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, polydrug abuse, and antisocial personality. As of 27 March 2017, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you at 100% for schizophrenia. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list. You argue that your post-discharge mental health issues including your VA rating for schizophrenia support relief. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board found insufficient evidence to support a finding that you were suffering from schizophrenia at the time of your discharge. The Board relied on the two mental health evaluations that were conducted on 17 May 1984 and 18 May 1984. In both evaluations, there was no diagnosis of schizophrenia despite findings that you suffered from immature personality traits and a personality disorder. In addition, you were determined to be psychiatrically fit for full duty on 17 May 1984. In the Board’s opinion, this was strong evidence of fitness for continued naval service. They concluded that you would have been able to continue your naval career but for your personality disorder, which is not considered a disability condition. Second, the Board determined that you fraudulently entered the Navy and should not benefit from your fraud. You failed to disclose extensive drug use and misconduct that would have disqualified you for enlistment. Further, your failure to disclose your hospitalization and diagnosis of schizophrenia was also determined to be fraudulent by the Board. The Navy, without a doubt, would have released you from active duty immediately had you informed them of your diagnosis. Third, the fact the VA concluded your schizophrenia was service connected did not convince the Board you were unfit for continued naval service in 1984. Eligibility for compensation and pension disability ratings by the VA is tied to the establishment of service connection and is manifestation-based without a requirement that unfitness for military duty be demonstrated. As explained earlier, the Board found insufficient evidence that you were unfit as a result of schizophrenia in 1984. In addition, the Board felt there were too many potential intervening factors, such as your continued drug abuse, that could have contributed to the deterioration of your mental health condition after your discharge from the Navy. While the Board acknowledges your mental health deteriorated significantly by 1987, in their opinion, because of those potential intervening factors, they could not form a nexus between your post- discharge mental health diagnoses and your active duty behavior. Accordingly, the Board concluded that insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record. Regarding your request for a disability discharge. A review of your DD Form 214 shows that the Navy erroneously listed preexisting disability as the narrative reason for your separation despite the fact you were discharged for the convenience of the government due to your personality disorder. The Board chose not to correct your record, as a matter of policy, to avoid creating a change that would be to your detriment. If you request that your record be changed to reflect your true reason for separation, please submit a new application requesting the change be made. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence 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, 4/24/2019