DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2541-20/2216-18 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER MEMBER 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 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 Honorable characterization of service, the narrative reason for separation and corresponding codes as “Secretarial Authority,” and that his rank of Lance Corporal be reinstated. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 May 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 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 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. Petitioner entered a period of active duty in the Marine Corps on 1 August 2005. He deployed to with 2nd Combat Engineer Battalion from March 2007 to October 2007. On 17 January 2008 Petitioner tested positive for cocaine. On 1 February 2008 he agreed to plead guilty at a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) and waive his procedural right to have his case heard by an administrative separation board. On 12 February 2008 Petitioner was notified of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, consulted with counsel, and waived his right to an administrative separation board. Petitioner was discharged on 22 August 2008 with an Other Than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 24 April 2019 this Board granted Petitioner partial relief and upgraded his characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions). c. Petitioner provided documentation that states he has been treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for severe PTSD since 2010. On 11 February 2014 Petitioner was awarded service connection for PTSD by the VA with an evaluation of 100% effective 5 November 2013. d. Petitioner contends during his deployment he volunteered to drive for route clearance teams and to transport wounded personnel. He states he was involved in three convoys that were either struck by improvised explosive devices (IED) or took fire. He lost three fellow Marines who died due to IED attacks similar to those he experienced, two of whom died during his deployment. Petitioner further contends upon testing positive for cocaine, his command did not make satisfactory efforts to explore the nexus between his combat deployment and his substance abuse. e. In support of his application Petitioner provided documentation that he has earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology and an Associate in Science degree, he is a member of the Honor Society and is gainfully employed. f. As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO dated 24 March 2021. The AO concurred with Petitioner’s contention that his misconduct was mitigated by his undiagnosed PTSD from his 2007 combat deployment. The AO concluded that the preponderance of objective evidence established that Petitioner suffered from PTSD incurred as a result of his military service and his in-service misconduct could be mitigated by his PTSD. CONCLUSION: The Board reviewed Petitioner’s application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief and that his narrative reason for separation should reflect “Secretarial Authority.” The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying on the AO, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner suffered from PTSD at the time of discharge. The Board took into consideration Petitioner’s 7 month deployment in support of combat operations during and that Petitioner did not receive mental health treatment while in-service. The Board further determined that Petitioner was granted relief as to his characterization of service in 2019 and that it was previously upgraded to General. Based on the serious nature of Petitioner’s misconduct, the Board found that Petitioner’s General characterization of service is appropriate. However, in the interest of justice and in light of the potential for future negative implications, the Board further determined Petitioner’s narrative reason should be changed to “Secretarial Authority” and his reentry code should be changed to RE-4. RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating the separation authority as “MARCORSEPMAN 6214,” separation code as “JFF1,” and narrative reason for separation as “Secretarial Authority.” The reentry code shall be changed to RE-4. The characterization of service will not be changed and Petitioner’s rank will not be restored. 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 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. 5/27/2021 3