DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF EX, 
Docket No: 11225-16 
JAN 10 2018 

From: Chairman, Board for Correction ofNaval Records 
To: Secretary of the Navy 

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 
(b) SECDEF Memo of3 Sep 14 
(c) PDUSD Memo of24 Feb 16 
Encl: (1) DD Fortn 149 with attachments 
(2) Case summary 
(3) Subject's naval record (excerpts) 
(4) BUMED Ser M34/17UM34245 ltr of 12Jull 7 

1. Pursuant to the provisions ofreference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member ofthe 
Navy, filed enclosure(1) with this Board requesting that the characterization of his other than 
honorable (OTH) discharge be changed in light ofcurrent guideli,nes as reflected in references 
(b) and(c). Enclosures(1) through (4) apply. 

2. The Board,                   consisting of reviewed Petitioner's 
majority determined that the partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the 
available evidence ofrecord. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofthe 
enclosures, relevant portions ofPetitioner's naval records and applicable statutes, regulations and 
policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Bureau 
ofMedicine and Surgery, dated 12 July 2017, a copy ofwhich is attached in enclosure (4). 

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts ofrecord 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 ofthe Navy. 

b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest ofjustice to 
waive the statute oflimitations and review the application on its merits. 

c. The Petitioner reenlisted in the Navy on 1March1982 after more than four years ofprior 
service. On 2 July 1984, he was admitted to the hospital after receiving a stab wound in the left 
upper quadrant ofthe abdomen by his wife. He experienced serious internal injuries and 
remained hospitalized from 2 July to 7 August 1984. Petitioner reported that this incident was 
emotionally traumatic for him and contributed to his experiencing emotional sequelea with 
subsequent alcohol and drug use to cope with his trauma. Petitioner was arrested for not 
appearing at court after receiving several automobile moving violations. On 7 February 1986, he 
was the subject of a mental health evaluation. The evaluation described the Petitioner as having 
a long history ofantisocial behaviors including truancy, drug abuse, spouse abuse, a burglary 
charge, conflicts with authority, financial irresponsibility and disregard for the truth. It was 
concluded the Petitioner had antisocial personality traits but did not require further psychiatric 
intervention. Petitioner tested positive for wrongful use ofcocaine and on 30 April 1986, during 
a drug/alcohol evaluation he admitted to using cocaine one to two times a month. He was 
diagnosed with drug dependence. 

d. On 15 July 1986, he was convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of five instances of 
wrongfully and unlawfully writing checks with insufficient funds totaling $129.00 to the Navy 
Exchange. The sentence imposed was confinement, a forfeiture ofpay and reduction in 
paygrade. Subsequently, he was administratively processed for separation by reason of 
misconduct due to commission ofa serious offense at which time he waived his procedural rights 
to consult with legal counsel and to present his case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 
His commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions 
by reason ofmisconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The discharge authority 
approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by 
reason of misconduct, and on 3 December 1986, he was discharged. 

e. About 29 years after discharge, Petitioner was diagnosed by the Veterans Administration 
(VA) with chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), cocaine dependence (in remission) and 
alcohol abuse. He reports that he used drugs as a way to cope with the traumatic emotional 
repercussions ofthe stabbing by his wife, which did produce a life-threatening situation that was 
traumatic. 

f. Enclosure (4), an advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Bureau ofMedicine and Surgery 
(BUMED), indicates that although the Petitioner experience drug problems during his first 
enlistment, it is reasonable to assume that he turned to drugs after experiencing a significant 
trauma such as the stabbing. A mental health evaluation from his first enlistment indicated that 
he was suffering from both anxiety and depression with suicidal thoughts. VA diagnosed the 
Petitioner with chronic PTSD secondary to his in-service trauma. Based on the preponderance of 
the evidence, it is the considered medical opinion that the Petitioner suffered from a mental 
health condition at the time of service that interfered with his judgment and led to an undesirable 
discharge. 

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration ofall the evidence ofrecord, the Board initially noted and 
considered Petitioner's history ofdisciplinary infractions and does not condone his misconduct, 
but concluded that Petitioner's request warrants partial favorable action. The panel reviewed his 
application under the guidance provided in reference (b ), Secretary ofDefense Memorandum of 
3 September 2014, "Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction ofMilitary/Naval 
Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD." Specifically, 
the panel considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by this 
policy. 

The purpose of the Secretary ofDefense memorandum is to ease the process for veterans seeking 
redress and assist the Boards in reaching fair and consistent results in "these difficult cases." The 
memorandum describes the difficulty veterans face on "upgrading their discharges based on 
claims ofpreviously unrecoguized" PTSD. The memorandum further explains that since PTSD 
was not previously recognized as a diagnosis at the time ofservice for many veterans, and 
diagnoses were often not made until after service was completed, veterans were constrained in 
their arguments that PTSD should be considered in mitigation for misconduct committed or were 
unable to establish a nexus between PTSD and the misconduct underlying their discharge. In 
this regard, the Board initially notes Petitioner's misconduct and does not condone his actions. 
However, the Board's decision is based on Petitioner's evidence as reflected in his medical and 
mental history documentation, psychological evaluation of PTSD and the BUMED AO. Further, 
the Board concluded that the PTSD was a causative factor in Petitioner's misconduct; this 
evidence led the Board to reasonably conclude that the PTSD condition existed at the time of his 
discharge and subsequently resulted in his OTH discharge. After carefully considering all the 
evidence, the Board decided that Petitioner's diagnosed PTSD should mitigate the misconduct he 
committed while on active duty since this condition outweighed the severity of the misconduct. 

The Board determined that no useful purpose is served by continuing to characterize the 
Petitioner's service as OTH, and recharacterization to an under honorable characterization of 
service is now more appropriate. Further the Board considered the Petitioner's Good Conduct 
Award. 

In view ofthe forgoing the Board finds the existence ofan injustice warranting the following 
corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That Petitioner's Navy record be corrected to show that on 3 December 1986, Petitioner's 
characterization ofservice was "General," under honorable conditions, the narrative reason for 
separation was "secretarial authority," the SPD code assigned was "JFF." 

That Petitioner shall be issued a new DD Form 214 which reflects the General, under 
honorable conditions discharge. 

That a copy ofthis Report ofProceedings should be filed in Petitioner's Navy record. 

That, upon request, the Department ofVeterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's 
application was received by the Board on 28 December 2016. 

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) ofthe revised Procedures ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval 
Records (32 Code ofFederal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was 
presented at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete 
record ofthe Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter. 

5. Pursuant to the delegation ofauthority set out in Section 6(e) ofthe revised Procedures ofthe 
Board for correction ofNaval Records (32 Code ofFederal 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 ofreference (a), has been approved by the Board on 
behalf ofthe Secretary of the Navy. 


Executive Director