DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7217-20 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 PTSD,” of 3 September 2014 (c) USD memo, “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI),” of 24 February 2016 (d) USD 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) USD memo of 25 Jul 2018 “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations,” of 25 July 2018 (f) Advisory Opinion of 24 April 2021 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case summary 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 discharge characterization to honorable and his narrative reason and authority for his separation to Secretarial Authority or, in the alternative, to Miscellaneous Reasons.” As described below, the Board recommended granting relief in the form of upgrading the Petitioner’s discharge characterization to honorable and his separation authority to Secretarial Authority. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 May 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, and references (b) through (e), which include the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 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 24 April 2021 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by qualified mental health provider 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to the subject former member’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, the Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. The Petitioner served honorably in the Navy from 18 November 1992 to 30 May 1996. He reenlisted on 31 May 1996. On 18 June 1996, the Petitioner reported to the medical department on his ship presenting with suicidal ideation and other concerns. He had additional medical consultations on 9 October 1996 and 3 April 1997 relating to his stress levels and other mental health concerns, and he was diagnosed as having an adjustment disorder and it was recommended that he be discharged due to a personality disorder. On 9 July 1997, he was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service on the basis of Personality Disorder. His final trait average at his time of discharge was 3.8. c. In 1999, the Petitioner filed an application with the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). He contended that he had medical problems that were not taken care of and that he was quickly rushed out of the Navy by his commanding officer. On 18 July 2000, the NDRB denied his application. In 2016, he petitioned this Board, asserting that he was wrongly diagnosed with a personality disorder. On 23 August 2017, this Board denied his petition. d. In his current petition, the Petitioner contends that for nearly seven years he proudly served in the Navy, and during that time, he was free of any disciplinary marks against him and he planned to retire, but after his mental breakdown on a ship, that all changed. He contends that the Navy punished him for his mental health condition, and that if the Navy had taken the time, it would have diagnosed him correctly and treated him accordingly; instead, he was forced out with a “Personality Disorder.” e. In connection with his assertion of a mental health condition, the Board requested an AO (reference (f)). The AO was considered favorable to Petitioner, and concluded, “it is my considered medical opinion there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with a mental health condition during his military service and his personality disorder may have been diagnosed in error.” CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and in view of references (b) through (f), the Board determined that, with respect to the specific relief that Petitioner requested, there exists an error or injustice warranting relief. Specifically, the Board found, consistent with the AO and applying liberal consideration, that Petitioner was incorrectly diagnosed with a personality disorder. In addition, with respect to his discharge characterization, the Board noted that there is no misconduct evidence in the Petitioner’s naval records and his final trait average justifies an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted unanimously to upgrade his discharge characterization to honorable as well as associated relief in the form of changing his reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority and separation code, as set forth in more detail below. Based on a careful review of all of the facts presented, the Board concludes that Petitioner is entitled to relief as follows. RECOMMENDATION In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued an honorable discharge certificate as well as a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) indicating that his discharge at separation was honorable, that the narrative reason and authority for his separation was Secretarial Authority, and separation code was JFF; and That no further changes be made to Petitioner’s record. A copy of this report of proceedings shall 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 the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 6/2/2021 3