Docket No: 409-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER , XXX-XX- Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 (b) SECDEF Memo of 3 Sep 14 “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD” (c) PDUSD Memo of 24 Feb 16 “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI” (d) PDUSD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “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” (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 w/enls (2) Advisory opinion of 4 Feb 20 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting an upgrade to his characterization of service from Other than Honorable (OTH) to Honorable, and a change to his RE-4 reentry code to RE-1 on his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). He also impliedly requested a change to the separation authority, separation code, and narrative reason for discharge. Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 22 March 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 25 August 2017 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, sexual assault, or sexual harassment (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, which was previously provided to Petitioner. 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 21 July 1980. c. On 2 February 1981, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failing to report an offense. d. On 14 April 1981, Petitioner received NJP for unauthorized absence (UA). e. On 22 November 1981, Petitioner received NJP for wrongful appropriation and UA. f. On 9 May 1984, Petitioner received NJP for UA, and was counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. g. On 11 May 1984, Petitioner was screened and diagnosed as an Alcohol Abuser. h. On 16 May and 24 August 1984, Petitioner received NJP for two periods of UA totaling less than 24 hours. i. On 29 August 1984, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of a pattern of misconduct. After being afforded his procedural rights, he requested to have his case heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB). j. On 31 August 1984, a request for alcohol rehabilitation was submitted by Petitioner’s defense counsel. k. On 7 September 1984, a Substance Abuse Report stated Petitioner had demonstrated no potential for further productive Naval service. l. On 15 October 1984, the ADB found that Petitioner committed a pattern of misconduct, and recommended a suspended separation with an OTH, provided that he successfully completed an alcohol rehabilitation program, that there would be no more violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for one year from 15 October 1984, and that his overall performance evaluation was above 3.0. m. On 12 December 1984, Petitioner was medically admitted for Alcohol Dependence, and diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence, in remission, and returned to full duty. Additionally, he completed treatment for alcoholism. n. On 21 December 1984, despite the recommendation of the ADB, Petitioner’s case was forwarded to the separation authority recommending that he receive an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. o. On 1 March 1985, the separation authority directed that Petitioner’s OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. p. On 15 March 1985, Petitioner was discharged from the Navy with an OTH characterization of service. q. Petitioner asserts that he was abused by a pastor before his enlistment and was dealing with undiagnosed PTSD. Based on this assertion, enclosure (2), an AO from the Board’s Physician Advisor, was provided to the Board for consideration. The AO concluded by opining that the preponderance of available objective evidence failed to establish Petitioner exhibited behaviors or psychological symptoms associated with PTSD during his military service, or that in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD or other mental health conditions. CONCLUSION Notwithstanding the conclusion of the AO, upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s request warrants partial favorable action in the form of relief. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e), and determined that in accordance with the Wilkie memo, Petitioner warrants relief as a matter of clemency. In this regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, the Board determined that his characterization of service should be changed to “General.” Additionally, the separation authority, separation code, and narrative reason for discharge should also be changed. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. RECOMMENDATION Issue Petitioner a new DD Form 214, showing that on 15 March 1985, he received a “General (under honorable condition)” characterization of service. Petitioner’s naval record is to be further corrected to show the separation authority was “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.” Change Petitioner’s separation code to read “JFF.” Change Petitioner’s narrative reason for discharge to “Secretarial Authority.” That no further action be granted. File a copy of this Report of Proceedings 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.