DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3972-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER MEMBER 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 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 a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 2. The Board, consisting of Ms. Mr. , and Mr. , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 2 June 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. 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 entered a period of active duty in the Navy on 5 November 1971 at the age of 18. His ship deployed to Vietnam in 1972 and returned in 1973. Petitioner entered a period of unauthorized absence (UA) on 3 May 1973 for 144 days until his surrender on 24 September 1973. On 19 October 1973 Petitioner was charged with UA in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and his case referred to a special court-martial (SPCM). On 23 October 1973 Petitioner requested an undesirable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Petitioner was discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service on 7 November 1973. d. While in a UA status on 14 May 1973, Petitioner self-referred to a civilian mental health clinic and was diagnosed with Transient Situational Disturbance, Adjustment Reaction of Adult Life, Psychosis Not Attributed to Physical Conditions, and Reactive Psychosis (unclassified). e. On 20 July 1973 Petitioner’s civilian psychologist recommended Petitioner be medically discharged. The civilian psychologist wrote a letter to the command on 7 August 1973 stating Petitioner threatened suicide if forced to return and he appeared unable to use sound judgment. f. On 17 January 2019 the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) diagnosed Petitioner with PTSD, Major Depression, and Alcohol Use Disorder stemming from his Vietnam combat deployment. The VA further granted Petitioner service connection for treatment purposes for those conditions on 7 March 2019. g. Petitioner contends he suffered from PTSD at the time of his discharge and treatment was not rendered due to an ignorance of PTSD at the time. He further contends he participated in numerous assignments including scouting and surveillance and gunfire spotter on land in Vietnam; the ship took fire at different times; he was involved in removing mines off the coast; he saw the dead bodies of U.S. service members, innocent civilians, and enemy soldiers; he aided in the killing of not only the enemy, but also the innocent and his brothers in arms, which haunts him to this day; he feared for his life the entire time while in Vietnam. He states his ship returned in the spring of 1973 and when he learned they would be returning to Vietnam he had a mental breakdown and made the irrational decision to leave base and go home. h. In support of his application Petitioner provided medical records and correspondence from 1973, and recent VA documentation. i. As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s available records and provided an AO dated 26 March 2021. The AO concurred with Petitioner’s contention that he developed PTSD as a result of the combat operations ashore he participated in during the Vietnam War. Furthermore, the AO concluded that the preponderance of objective evidence established Petitioner suffered from PTSD at the time of his military service, and his in-service misconduct could be mitigated by his experience of 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 relief and that his characterization of service should be corrected to reflect general (under honorable conditions). The Board, applying special 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 as a result of the combat operations he participated in while deployed to Vietnam. Furthermore, Petitioner provided ample medical records and correspondence in support of his application lending credibility to his contentions. Accordingly, in the interests of justice, Petitioner shall be granted relief. RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating the characterization of service as “General (Under Honorable Conditions).” That no other changes be made and 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 7/6/2021 Executive Director