DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6609-20 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO 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 (2) Case Summary (3) Advisory Opinion, Docket No: NR20200006609 of 24 Apr 21 (4) Rebuttal to Advisory Opinion (5) Revised Advisory Opinion of 8 Jun 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), requesting his naval record be corrected to reflect an honorable characterization of service. 2. The Board, consisting of Ms. , Mr. , and Mr. , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 23 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 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) previously furnished by a qualified mental health provider, Petitioner’s rebuttal to the AO, and a revised AO. 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 Navy on 7 August 2002. On 27 February 2004, he received nonjudicial punishment for three instances of disobeying a lawful general order by inhaling nitrous oxide fumes with the intent of achieving an intoxicating effect and wrongfully consuming and possessing alcohol while under the age of 21. d. Subsequently, Petitioner was notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and elected his right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 28 April 2004, the ADB determined the preponderance of the evidence supported a finding of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and, by a vote of 2 to 1, recommended Petitioner’s separation with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), character of service. Petitioner’s commanding officer, the discharge authority, approved the ADB recommendation and directed Petitioner be discharged with a GEN character of service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Petitioner was discharged on 6 May 2004. e. Petitioner contends his struggles and behavior in the Navy were directly related to his undiagnosed PTSD. f. As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided enclosure (3) which stated there was insufficient evidence describing Petitioner’s traumatic events, symptoms of PTSD, and their specific link to his misconduct. g. In response to enclosure (3), Petitioner submitted enclosure (4), a statement and supporting documents, in rebuttal. He explained traumatic events in June 2003 and July 2003 when he feared for his life and also explained an incident of severe hazing and bullying. Petitioner contends these traumatic events caused him to look for ways to “cope and fit in” with a “bad crowd.” Petitioner also submitted medical treatment notes detailing a psychiatric hospitalization 6-7 April 2004 which resulted in a diagnosis of major depression. h. The qualified mental health provider provided enclosure (5), a revised AO, after his review of enclosure (4). The AO stated Petitioner’s contention his untreated PTSD was the underlying cause of his misconduct was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs rating decision. The AO concluded there was sufficient objective evidence that Petitioner exhibited symptoms and behavior changes indicative of early PTSD and major depression during his military service and his misconduct can be attributed to his mental health conditions of PTSD and major depression. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants relief. The Board reviewed the application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying on enclosure (5), the revised AO, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner suffered from PTSD at the time of his military service and his misconduct of inhaling nitrous oxide fumes and drinking underage should be mitigated by his PTSD. Additionally, in the interest of justice and in light of the potential for future negative implications, the Board further determined Petitioner’s narrative reason, separation code, and separation authority should be changed to “secretarial authority” and his reentry code changed to correspond with “secretarial authority.” RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 and new discharge certificate indicating the characterization of service as “honorable,” narrative reason for separation as “secretarial authority,” separation code as “JFF,” separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 1910-164,” and reentry code as “RE-1J.” That 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 Regulations, 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. 6/29/2021 Executive Director