DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6862-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER 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 (2) Advisory Opinion of 14 Apr 21 1. Pursuant to reference (a), Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) requesting that his other than honorable (OTH) discharge be upgraded. He also impliedly requested that the separation authority, separation code, and narrative reason for discharge be changed. Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 21 June 2020, 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), 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 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 17 January 1990. c. On 24 August 1990, Petitioner was convicted by civil authorities of Disturbing the Peace. d. On 9 October 1990, Petitioner was counseled concerning his violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and conviction by civil authorities. He was warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. e. On 12 February 1991, Petitioner failed to meet physical readiness standards due to obesity. f. On 25 September 1991, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for four days of unauthorized absence (UA). g. On 20 November 1991, Petitioner was counseled concerning UA, and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. h. On 12 December 1991, Petitioner received NJP for two specifications of disrespect. i. On 1 January 1992, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action for misconduct due to his civilian conviction, commission of a serious offense, and a pattern of misconduct. After being afforded his procedural rights, he elected to submit a statement. j. On 21 January 1992, Petitioner’s case was forwarded to the separation authority with a recommending that he receive an OTH discharge due to misconduct. k. On 3 February 1992, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that Petitioner receive an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. l. On 4 February 1992, Petitioner was discharged from the Navy with an OTH characterization of service. m. In his application, Petitioner contends that he suffers from mental illness caused by his time in the Navy, and that his instability led to the behavior that led to his discharge. n. The Board’s mental health provider provided the Board with AO which concluded that that there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with a mental health condition during his military service and his misconduct may be mitigated by his 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 (e) 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, in light of enclosure (2), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, the Board concluded that relief should be granted in the in the form of changing his characterization of service to “General (under honorable conditions).” 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 corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected by showing that on 4 February 1992; he received a “General (under honorable condition)” discharge. That Petitioner’s naval record be further corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to read “Secretarial Authority.” That the separation authority read “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.” That the separation code read “JFF.” 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 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. 3 6/24/2021 4