Docket No: 8239-19 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:      Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF   
      
 
Ref:      (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552  
          (b) SECDEF memo, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for  
                Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by  
                Veterans Claiming PTSD,” of 3 September 2014    
          (c)  PDUSD memo, “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant  
                to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI,” of 24 February 2016  
          (d) PDUSD memo, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge 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,” of 25 August 2017 
          (e) USECDEF Memo, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for  
   Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency    Determinations,” of 25 July 2018 
 
Encl:  (1) DD Form 149 with attachments 
          (2) Case Summary 
    (3) Advisory Opinion, Docket No:  NR20190008239 of 24 Nov 2020 
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his naval record be corrected to reflect an upgraded characterization of service.  
 
2.  The Board consisting of  reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 January 2021 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined the corrective action indicated below should be taken.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Petitioner’s application together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, to include the Kurta Memo, the 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo).  Additionally, the Board also considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health provider.   
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. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to review the application on its merits.   
 
 c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 6 April 1987.  After serving honorably during his first and second enlistments, he reenlisted on 19 July 1993.  On 6 September 1995, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of methamphetamine.   
 
 d.  Subsequently, Petitioner was notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  After he waived his procedural rights, Petitioner’s commanding officer recommended administrative separation by reason of misconduct with an other than honorable (OTH) character of service.  The discharge authority concurred and directed Petitioner be discharged with an OTH character of service due to misconduct.  Petitioner was discharged on 15 October 1995.    
 
 e.  Petitioner contends the following:   
 
  1) Petitioner suffered mentally after traumatic events and was not offered any form of help or assistance.  Specifically, Petitioner states he was on the flight deck of the USS  in 1990 when a helo returning for refueling crashed into the ocean.  His friend’s body was recovered but the bodies of the remaining crew, also his friends, were not recovered.  Further, Petitioner details his experience on the USS  when the ship struck a mine.  Lastly, Petitioner shares how, in 1992 during OPERATION RESTORE HOPE, he was flown to the beach to show the embarked Marines how to use a fuel hose.  On his return flight to the ship, the helo was unexpectedly loaded with three dead bodies.   
 
  2) Petitioner contends he attempted suicide by cutting his wrists in 1993 after consulting the ship’s chaplain who “boldly advised me to ‘suck it up and get back to work.’”   
 
  3) Petitioner contends he again attempted suicide in 1995 by ingesting a large amount of methamphetamines.  When his attempt was unsuccessful, he states he again consulted the chaplain and admitted his suicide attempt.  He further contends the chaplain notified his division officer, and Petitioner was ordered to provide a urine sample.   
 
  4) Based on the positive urinalysis, Petitioner received NJP.  He contends he should have “at the very least been offered treatment and counseling to get to the root of the problem of how a perfect leader, divisional career counselor, divisional training petty officer, and freshly awarded NAM recipient, as well as flight deck fuels leading petty officer, and ranked 2 of 11 second class petty officers…with orders in hand as a firefighting school instructor” could so abruptly be considered “not fit for our great military.”   
 
 f.  As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided enclosure (3).  The AO confirmed Petitioner has been diagnosed by the Department of Veterans Affairs, post-service, with PTSD, as well as alcohol use disorder, connected to his military service.  Based on the available evidence, the AO concludes there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with PTSD during military service and his misconduct may be mitigated by his PTSD. 
  
CONCLUSION: 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  The Board reviewed the application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e).  Specifically, the Board considered whether the application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy. 
 
The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying on the AO and Petitioner’s credible account of the traumatic events he experienced during military service, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner suffered from PTSD.  The Board determined his misconduct, a single drug-use NJP which he contends was his attempt to commit suicide, was mitigated by his PTSD.  In the interest of justice and in light of the potential for future negative implications, the Board further determined Petitioner’s narrative reason, separation code, and separation authority should be changed to “secretarial authority.”  
 
RECOMMENDATION: 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214, indicating his characterization of service as “honorable,” the narrative reason for separation as “secretarial authority,” separation code as “JFF,” and separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.”   
 
That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 
 
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 Regulations, 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.