Docket No: 1823-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER , USN, XXX-XX- 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 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” of 3 September 2014 (Hagel Memo) (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) USD Memo, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and 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 (Kurta Memo) (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 (Wilkie Memo) Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) Case summary 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 upgrade his characterization of service and to make other conforming changes to his DD Form 214 following his discharge for a personality disorder. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 16 April 2021, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that 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 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta 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 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, the Board determined that it was in the interests of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 24 February 1993. Petitioner’s pre-enlistment physical and medical history both noted no psychiatric or neurologic conditions or symptoms. d. In only his first week of initial recruit training, on 1 March 1993 Petitioner underwent a mental health evaluation at the Recruit Evaluation Unit, Mental Health Department at Naval Hospital Great Lakes. The Petitioner was diagnosed with a borderline personality disorder that existed prior to entry on active duty. The Petitioner was deemed a suicide risk and a risk of harm to others, and the Medical Officer strongly recommended Petitioner’s expeditious administrative separation. e. On 2 March 1993 Petitioner’s command initiated administrative separation proceedings by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of Petitioner’s diagnosed personality disorder. Petitioner waived his rights to consult with counsel, submit statements on his own behalf, and for General Court-Martial Convening Authority review of his discharge. Petitioner also did not formally object to his discharge. Ultimately, on 8 March 1993 Petitioner was discharged from the Navy with an uncharacterized entry level separation (ELS) and assigned an RE-4 reentry code. The Board specifically noted that on his DD Form 214 the narrative reason for separation was “Other Physical/Mental Conditions -- Personality Disorder.” f. In short, Petitioner contended that his service was honorable, his discharge was due to medical reasons beyond his control, and that he did not have any bad conduct and left Great Lakes honorably. g. As part of the review process, the Board’s Physician Advisor, who is a licensed clinical psychologist (Ph.D.), reviewed Petitioner’s contentions and the available records and issued an AO on 1 March 2021. The Ph.D. initially observed that Petitioner was diagnosed with a personality disorder based on criteria such as history of self-mutilation, a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, and chronic feelings of emptiness and boredom. The Ph.D. noted that Petitioner’s in-service records supported a personality disorder diagnosis, and that the Petitioner did not provide any documentation to support either an alternate mental health diagnosis, refute the personality disorder diagnosis, or substantiate a medical disorder. The Ph.D. concluded by opining that there was insufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with a mental health condition on active duty that mitigated his personality disorder diagnosis. CONCLUSION Upon review and liberal consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. Additionally, the Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in the Hagel, Kurta, and Wilkie Memos. Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by these policies. In keeping with the letter and spirit of the Hagel, Kurta, and Wilkie Memos, the Board determined that it would be an injustice to label one’s discharge as being for a diagnosed character and behavior disorder. Describing Petitioner’s service in this manner attaches a considerable negative and unnecessary stigma, and fundamental fairness and medical privacy concerns dictate a change. Accordingly, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s discharge should not be labeled as being for a mental health-related condition and that certain remedial administrative changes are warranted to the DD Form 214. Notwithstanding the recommended corrective action below, the Board was not willing to modify/upgrade the Petitioner’s discharge characterization and believed that Sailors should receive no higher discharge characterization than is due. The Board noted that Navy discharge policy provides that separations initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active duty will be described as ELS except when an honorable discharge is approved by the Secretary of the Navy in cases involving unusual circumstances not applicable in Petitioner’s case. Additionally, the Board determined that Petitioner had a legal, moral, and ethical obligation to remain truthful on his enlistment paperwork. The Board concluded that if Petitioner had properly and fully disclosed his pre-service mental health behavioral history he would have likely been disqualified from enlisting. Accordingly, the Board determined that there was no impropriety or inequity in Petitioner’s discharge, and even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s ELS characterization and reentry code was proper and in compliance with all Navy directives and policy at the time of his discharge. RECOMMENDATION In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. That Petitioner’s the narrative reason for separation should be changed to “Secretarial Authority,” the separation authority be changed to “MILPERSMAN 1910-164,” and the separation code be changed to “JFF.” That Petitioner shall be issued a new DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 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.