Docket No 2617-20 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 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 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Advisory Opinion of 8 Feb 21 1. Pursuant to reference (a), Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) requesting that his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of and reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 17 May 2020, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. 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, 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). 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 6 March 1990. c. On 15 June 1991, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for six days of unauthorized absence (UA). Additionally, he was counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. d. On 11 July 1992, Petitioner began a period of UA that lasted until he was apprehended by civilian authorities on 18 October 1993. e. On 18 November 1993, Petitioner was convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 463 days of UA. He was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and a BCD. f. On 14 February 1995, Petitioner received a BCD. g. Petitioner asserts that while serving onboard the , he suffered from undiagnosed PTSD, anxiety and depression due to a traumatic experience, which caused him to make a lot of irrational decisions. He was terrified due to the murder of one of his shipmates by another Sailor who was part of his division. Petitioner states that his friend was invited by three others to go on a trip, was brutally murdered/mutilated, and his body parts were stowed in the trunk of a vehicle, and he has continued to have nightmares about the event. Additionally, he asserts that he witnessed another Shipmate be sucked into the intake of F18 fighter jet, and witnessed another fall overboard while in the Gulf war. h. Enclosure (2) is an Advisory Opinion that was provided to the Board. The AO concluded that the preponderance of objective evidence established that Petitioner was diagnosed with PTSD post-discharge, suffered from PTSD at the time of his military service, and that his in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action in the form of relief. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e) intended to be covered by this policy. In this regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, in light of enclosure (2), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, the Board concluded that his characterization of service should be changed to “General (under honorable conditions).” In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected by showing that on 14 February 1995 he received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. That Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). No further action be granted. 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. 5/28/2021 Executive Director