DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 5170-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER , USMC 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 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Advisory Opinion of 1 Apr 21 (4) NDRB Decision ltr of 28 Mar 78 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 by upgrading his characterization of service. 2. The Board consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 23 July 2021 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 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), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding , USMC equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). Additionally, The Board also considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health provider. (Enclosure (3)). 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 enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 12 August 1974. d. On 10 February 1975, Petitioner was given an administrative counseling concerning his performance as a Marine Sentry. Petitioner was also advised that further infractions may result in non-judicial punishment (NJP). e. On 3 February 1975, Petitioner absented himself from his unit for about four (4) days, and subsequently received NJP for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status. f. On 18 February 1975, Petitioner absented himself from his unit for about seven (7) days, and subsequently received NJP for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status. g. On 21 April 1975, Petitioner was in a UA status for a period of about ten (10) days until he surrendered to his command on 1 May 1975. h. On 2 May 1975, Petitioner was in a UA status for a period of about sixty-five (65) days until he was apprehended by civilian authorities on 6 July 1975 and returned to military authorities. i. On 11 July 1975, Petitioner submitted a request for Separation in Lieu of Trial (SILT) by court-martial due to his two (2) consecutive UA periods. j. On 14 July 1975, the Staff Judge Advocate determined proceedings were sufficient in law and fact, and recommended approval of the SILT. The discharge authority approved the SILT and directed Petitioner be separated with an undesirable characterization of service. On 30 July 1975, Petitioner was discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. k. In March 1978, Petitioner applied to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for an upgrade to his service characterization citing the discharge is inequitable based upon the nature of the offenses for which he requested discharge. After careful consideration, NDRB’s decision , USMC was split with the majority of the board recommending a change to “general, under honorable conditions” due to Good of the Service. However, after Secretarial review in accordance with regulations, and taking careful consideration on the relevant issues raised, it was determined that Petitioner’s discharge was proper as issued and that no change was warranted. (Enclosure (4)). l. In his application, Petitioner contends his wife committed suicide, which was the reason he went UA. m. As part of the review process, a qualified mental health professional who provided an unfavorable AO for the Board’s consideration. The AO noted Petitioner’s in-service records did not contain evidence of a diagnosis of a mental health condition or psychological/behavioral changes, which may have indicated a mental health condition. Although the Petitioner claimed PTSD and provided a description of the trauma, he did not provide a description of symptoms, which would meet the criteria for PTSD or indicate when the trauma occurred. The lack of information made available did not provide enough markers to establish an onset and development of mental health symptoms or identify a nexus with his misconduct. Based on the available evidence, the AO concluded by opining the preponderance of available evidence failed to establish Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with victims of PTSD, incurred a mental health condition as a result of his military service, or his in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. 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 (d) 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, to include high performance marks in proficiency and the relevant issues raised, the Board, applying liberal consideration and the factors outlined in reference (e), the Wilkie Memo, concluded that although it found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice, Petitioner’s request warranted clemency in the form of an upgrade to his characterization of service to “general, under honorable conditions”. RECOMMENDATION: In view of the foregoing, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) indicating his characterization of service as “general, under honorable conditions”. 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. 8/3/2021