Docket No 4820-20 


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 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 Requestsby 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 ClemencyDeterminations,” of 25 July 2018

Encl: 	(1) DD Form 149 w/enls 
	(2)Advisory opinion of 11 Apr 21

1.Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Boardrequesting her husband’s Bad Conduct discharge be upgraded to Honorable on his Report ofSeparation from Active Duty (DD Form 214) due to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).She also impliedly requested that the separation authority, separation code and narrative reasonfor discharge be changed.  Enclosures (1) and (2) apply.

2.The Board, consisting of  and  reviewed Petitioner'sallegations of error and injustice on 7 June 2021, and pursuant to its regulations, determined thatthe partial corrective action indicated below should be taken.  Documentary material consideredby the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records,applicable statutes, regulations, policies, to include the 25 July 2018 guidance from the UnderSecretary 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 toPetitioner.

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’s husband enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 8 August 1968.  During his service, he participated in Military Operations at  from  28 May 69 to 14 Feb 70.  He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal w/1, and Vietnam Campaign Medal w/device. 
 
     c.  During the period from 17 January to 10 July 1969, he received three nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence, malingering, forgery, and sleeping on post.   
 
     d.  On 11 June 1970, he was convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of, by means of force and violence and putting him in fear attempt to steal 8,000 yen, the property of a civilian.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement at hard labor not to exceed five years, a reduction in rank to paygrade E-1, and a dishonorable discharge (DD).  Petitioner’s husband received his DD on 20 August 1971. 
 
     e.  On 7 February 1980, the Board reviewed his discharge and changed his DD to a bad conduct discharge.  
  
     f.  With her application, Petitioner stated,  became a good man, in part, by his experience of being a Marine.  He became an outstanding citizen and contributed to society.  He was a good husband, father and friend.”    
 
     g.  On 13 July 2020, the Board requested additional medical or clinical evidence to support her claim. 
 
     h.  On 23 Jul 2020, the Petitioner responded by stating “Thank you for taking the time to review my request to upgrade discharge.  In my previous letter, I am speaking of my experiences living with and loving  through what we became to believe was PTSD. Unfortunately, I do not have any medical records for . Some of the experiences  and I worked through were depression, busts of anger, walking on egg shells not to upset him, heavy alcohol abuse and the worst was when he saw or thought he saw the "enemy" coming and hiding under his desk. I am not a doctor or nurse that can diagnose medical conditions, but I do know when there is a problem and he definitely had a problem. I am so grateful and thankful that after 3-5 years, we were able to get beyond these episodes and move onto a wonderful and productive life.  was always a good man, who worked past his problems to become a productive citizen. He certainly was worth the title of United States Marine. Again, thank you for considering the upgrade to his discharge.” 
 
     i.  Enclosure (2), states that the objective evidence supports the Petitioner’s contention her husband suffered from PTSD as a result of his military service and that his in-service misconduct, that occurred after his Vietnam deployment, can be mitigated by his PTSD. 
  
     j.  Petitioner’s request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board 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" memorandum of 25 August 2017. 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
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 her application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e) intended to be covered by this policy.    
  
In this regard, the Board noted her husband’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions.  However, based upon his overall record, minimal post-service information, and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, relief in the form of his characterization of service should be changed to “General.”  Additionally, the separation authority, separation code and narrative reason for discharge should be changed. 
 
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. 
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214, showing that on 20 August 1971, her husband received a “General (under honorable conditions)” characterization of service. 
 
The her husband’s naval record be further corrected to show the separation authority was “MARCORSEPMAN par 6214,” the separation code be changed to read “JFF1,” and narrative reason for discharge be changed to read “Secretarial Authority.”  
 
That 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.      
                                                             
							 	6/15/2021
								Executive Director