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 w/attachments 
        (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 9 Feb 21 
   
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), stating that he suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during his military service.  He is requesting an upgrade of his other than honorable (OTH) discharge to honorable.  Further, he also impliedly request that the narrative reason for his discharge, separation authority, and reenlistment code be changed.  Enclosures (1) and (2) applies. 
 
2.  The Board, consisting of  reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 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 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 opinions (AOs) 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.  Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 2 October 1968. 
   
     c.  During the period from 2 June to 24 July 1969, Petitioner participated in five combat operations.  
  
     d.  During the period from 27 October 1969 to 18 February 1970, Petitioner received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for two specifications of failing to go to his appointed place of duty (fire watch and working party), and using disrespectful language. 
 
     e.  On 5 March 1970, Petitioner was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of wrongful possession of marijuana. 
 
     f.  On 12 March 1970, Petitioner received NJP for having an unclean weapon, willful disobedience by failing to get out of his rack, and violation of a written order. 
 
     g.  On 1 April 1970, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of unfitness.  Further, his case was forwarded to the separation authority via the chain of command with the recommendation that he receive an undesirable discharge. 
 
     h.  On 9 April 1970, Petitioner received NJP for breaking restriction. 
 
     i.  On 11 April 1970, Petitioner received NJP for refusing to sign restriction documents.  Further, his administrative discharge case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that he be separated from the Marine Corps. 
 
     j.  On 20 May 1970, a staff judge advocate reviewed Petitioner’s case and found it to be sufficient in law and fact, and recommended separation from the Marine Corps. 
 
     k.  On 5 June 1970, Petitioner was discharged from the Marine Corps with an OTH characterization of service. 
 
     l.  During Petitioner’s service, he received the Combat Action Ribbon , National Defense Service Medal,  Service Medal with four bronze campaign stars, Republic of  Meritorious Unit Citation (Gallantry Cross with palm and frame) ribbon bar, Republic of  Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, and Sharpshooter badge.  
 
     m.  With his application, Petitioner submitted a personal statement regarding his service, and a copy of his Client Information Record documenting his medical history. 
  
     n.  Enclosure (2), states that based on the available evidence, there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with PTSD during his military service and his misconduct may be mitigated by his PTSD.   
  
     o.  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, 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  
 
BOARD 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, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, including his service in , in light of enclosures (2), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, relief in the form of his characterization of service should be, changed to “Honorable,” and that the narrative reason for separation read “Secretarial Authority.”    
  
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 
 
BOARD RECOMMENDATION  
 
That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected to show that on 5 June 1970, he received an “Honorable” characterization of service. 
 
That Petitioner’s naval record be further corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to read “Secretarial Authority,” 
 
That the separation authority read “MARCORSEPMAN para 6214.”   
 
That the reenlistment code read “RE-1J.” 
  
That the 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 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.