DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7113-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER XXX-XX-, 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 byVeterans 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 of 25 Apr 21 (3) Advisory Opinion of 11 May 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 that his naval record be corrected by upgrading his characterization of service from other than honorable to general, under honorable conditions, and to provide a review and verification of awards and ribbons associated with his military service. 2. The Board consisting of Ms. , Ms. and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 21 June 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 equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). Additionally, The Board also considered the advisory opinions (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health provider and Head, Policy and Verification Section, Military Awards Branch (MMMA-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 1 June 1992. d. On 3 February 1993, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being incapacitated in the performance of duties and five (5) specifications of disobeying an order, to wit: operating a vehicle while intoxicated, refusing to take a breath analyzer aboard , (CLNC), underage drinking, having an open alcohol container entering CLNC, and for failing to get out of his rack and falling into formation. e. On 4 March 1993, Petitioner received NJP for disobeying an order by consuming alcohol in a duty status and two (2) specifications of failing to go at the time prescribed, to wit: restriction sign-in. Petitioner was counseled regarding frequent involvement with military or civilian authorities and minor incidences prejudicial to good order and discipline. He was warned that further deficiencies in performance or conduct may result in processing for administrative separation. f. On 24 March 1993, Petitioner received NJP for two (2) specifications of disobeying an order, to wit: operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and refusing to take a breath analyzer aboard CLNC. g. From 13-17 September 1993, Petitioner participated in Operation Provide Promise/Deny Flights aboard the in the Adriatic Sea. From 12 October 1993 to 11 November 1993, Petitioner participated in Operation Continue Hope UNOSOM II aboard the in the Indian Ocean. From 4 January 1994 to 15 January 1994, Petitioner participated in Operation Provide Promise/Deny Flight aboard the in the Adriatic Sea. h. On 19 November 1995, Petitioner was placed in pre-trial confinement until he was released on 16 May 1996. On 4 June 1996, Petitioner was convicted at a General Court-Martial (GCM) for three (3) specifications of assault and three (3) specifications of drunk and disorderly conduct. Petitioner was sentenced to reduction to E-1/Private, confinement for nine (9) months, and awarded a BCD. Petitioner was credited with serving 180 days toward the period of confinement. Although Petitioner’s DD214 reflects that the narrative reason for separation was as a result of a Special Court-Martial, his records indicate he was convicted at a GCM. i. On 25 Jul 1996, Petitioner was placed on appellate leave awaiting review of his punitive discharge. Prior to departing on appellate leave, the Petitioner’s commanding officer conducted an end of service interview and commented: “SNM is being discharged w/a BCD; all incidents involve alcohol and SNM has never been interviewed for abuse! We might have been able to save a Marine if we had been more proactive and finding the root of his disruptive behavior. SNM has ok pro/con marks. I believe he could have been saved. Wish him the best luck in the future. Strongly recommend that he seek help from AA”. j. On 14 July 1997, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence, as adjudged and approved, at the GCM held on 4 June 1996. On 1 October 1997, the Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Review Activity completed its review. On 7 October 1997, Petitioner was discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps with a BCD. k. In his application, Petitioner states that his civilian attorney told him prior to his discharge that his discharge status would be upgraded. He believes that he fulfilled his four (4) year contract prior to receiving a BCD. l. Petitioner contends he is currently being seen at the Veterans Affairs hospital for PTSD, depression and alcoholism as a result of his combat service in support of Operation Provide Promise/Deny Flight. However, he is having difficulty receiving access to treatment due to his service-connected status along with his discharge characterization of service. m. Petitioner further contends there are many missing awards and ribbons from his DD214. He believes he is entitled to additional awards based on his combat history. n. Enclosure (2) is an AO provided to the board by the Board’s mental health professional. The AO concluded the preponderance of objective evidence established that Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with PTSD during his military service, and some of his misconduct may be mitigated by his mental health condition. o. Enclosure (3) is an AO provided to the board by the Military Awards Branch (MMMA-3). The AO concluded that because the Petitioner was discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps with a BCD characterization of service, the medals listed on his DD214 could only be addressed. Furthermore, it was concluded that should the Petitioner’s discharge be upgraded to a favorable characterization of service, entitlement to additional awards could be verified. 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 regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, to include satisfactory performance marks in conduct, in light of enclosure (2), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, relief in the form of changing his characterization of service to “general, under honorable conditions” should be granted. 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 corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected by showing that on 7 October 1997, he received a “general, under honorable” characterization of service. That Petitioner’s naval record be further corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to read “Secretarial Authority;” separation authority to read “MARCORSEPMAN 6421;” and separation code to read “JFF.” That the Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). That the Military Awards Branch (MMMA-3) conduct a subsequent review of the Petitioner’s records to verify entitlement to any additional awards. 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. 7/14/2021 Executive Director