DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10527-18 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (b) SECDEF Memo of 3 Sep 14 “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/NavalRecords Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD” (c) PDUSD Memo of 24 Feb 16 “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI” (d) PDUSD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “Clarifying Guidance to MilitaryDischarge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault or Sexual Harassment” Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 18 Jun 19 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his characterization of service be upgraded to Honorable. He also impliedly requested that the separation authority “MILPERSMAN 3630620,” separation code “HKK,” and narrative reason for separation “Misconduct” be changed on his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 9 March 2020, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of the naval records, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, post-service diagnosis, and an advisory opinion (AO) provided by a Navy mental health professional, which was previously provided to the Petitioner. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 2 November 1994. On 28 March 1995, medical personnel opined that Petitioner had a severe personality disorder, which was characterized by a history of repeated self-injurious acts, substance abuse, emotional lability, and a lack of motivation. It was recommended that he be separated from the Navy; if not, he would be an ongoing risk for additional self-injurious acts. c. On 5 April 1995, a Navy Drug Lab message reported that Petitioner had tested positive for marijuana use. On 4 May1995, he was notified of administrative discharge action due to drug abuse and a personality disorder diagnosis. Petitioner was afforded his procedural rights, he elected to waive his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board. On 9 May 1995, his commanding officer forwarded his case to the separation authority recommending that he be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 7 June 1995, the separation authority directed Petitioner’s separation from the Navyfor misconduct due to drug abuse with an OTH discharge. Petitioner received his OTH discharge on 20 June 1995. d. The Petitioner states he had a nervous breakdown while on leave and was admitted to a psych ward for 12 days after finding out that his mother was diagnosed with terminal cancer, and his cousin had died in his arms. That upon his return to his ship, he had another breakdown and was immediately admitted to a psych ward. Additionally, he did not understand or realize what he was signing in relation to his discharge because of his mental condition. He concedes that he had marijuana in his system, but he asserts that he did not realize what he was doing or signing. e. Enclosure (2), an AO from a Navy mental health professional states that in his pre­enlistment paperwork, he reported prior marijuana and alcohol use and acknowledged civilian charges for possession of marijuana, possession of alcohol as a minor, and driving while intoxicated. During his check-in urinalysis, the Petitioner tested positive for marijuana use. In March 1995, the Petitioner was hospitalized twice for suicidal ideation and superficial wrist laceration. He was diagnosed with a personality disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) and recommended for administrative separation due to risk of additional self-injurious behavior. In his current request for review, the Petitioner submitted a personal statement that he incurred a mental health condition during military service due to several stressors he was experiencing, including witnessing the death of his cousin and his mother’s terminal cancer diagnosis. In-service, the Petitioner was diagnosed with a long-standing disorder of character that predated military service and is not attributed to military service. There is no evidence of an additional mental health disorder. The Petitioner’s in-service behavior, which resulted in his discharge characterization, is consistent with his long-standing characterological traits and his pre-service behavior. Based on the preponderance of the evidence, there is evidence to attribute the Petitioner’s misconduct to his in-service diagnosed personality disorder. f. Petitioner’s request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment” memorandum of 25 August 2017. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. Additionally, the Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (d). Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by these policies. In this regard, based upon Petitioner’s overall record of service, to include his drug use, the Board noted Petitioner’s conduct and does not condone his actions. However, the Board’s decision is based on Petitioner’s evidence as reflected by comments in enclosure (2), that there is evidence to attribute the Petitioner’s misconduct to his in-service diagnosed personality disorder. The Board also felt that Petitioner’s drug use and his contention of a mental health condition should mitigate the misconduct he committed while on active duty since this condition outweighed the severity of the misconduct. With that being determined, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is served by continuing to characterize the Petitioner’s service as having been OTH, and re-characterization to “General (under honorable conditions)” is now more appropriate. The Board also concludes that he receive a new DD Form 214 indicating the narrative reason for his discharge was “Secretarial Authority,” in order to eliminate the possibility of invasive questions. Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that based on the preponderance of the evidence, there is evidence to attribute the Petitioner’s misconduct to his in-service diagnosed personality disorder. The Board voted to leave the reentry code as “RE-4.” In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected by changing the characterization for separation to General (under honorable conditions). Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to reflect “Secretarial Authority.” Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). Separation authority to read “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.” Separation Code to read “JFF.” No further action be granted. A copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. Upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 16 October 2018. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.