Docket No: 10050-19
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- 
          
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 w/attachments 
        (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 6 Jan 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), stating that he suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of his military service.  He is requesting that his General (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable.  He also impliedly request that the narrative reason for his discharge, separation authority, and separation code be changed.  Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 
 
2.  The Board, consisting of   reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 22 February 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, 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 a qualified mental health provider.    
  
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 7 July 1980.    
 
     c.  On 11 September 1984, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for four specifications of failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  Additionally, he was counseled and given a retention warning that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.    
  
     d.  On 20 September 1984, Petitioner received NJP for a brief period of unauthorized absence.  Additionally, he was again counseled and given a retention warning that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.    
  
     e.  On 7 February 1985, Petitioner received NJP for again being absent from his appointed place of duty.  
 
     f.  On 27 February 1985, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of a pattern of misconduct.  Petitioner did not desire to consult with counsel, and he did not request and Administrative Board.  He elected to submit a statement, which stated he fully understood the reasons for punishment, but felt like he had been punished enough. 
 
     g.  On 21 March 1985, Petitioner’s commanding officer forwarded his case to the separation authority recommending expeditious separation. 
 
     h.  On 6 April 1985, the separation authority directed that Petitioner’s discharge from the Navy due to a pattern of misconduct with a General (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 
 
     i.  On 15 April 1985, Petitioner was discharged from the Navy with a General (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  
 
     j.  Petitioner contends he developed PTSD as a result of multiple and continuous traumatic incidents through the course of his enlistment that culminated in a psychiatric hospitalization, deterioration of his mental health and ability to adhere to expected military standards of conduct, substance abuse, disciplinary actions and eventual administrative separation for misconduct. 

      k.  Enclosure (2), the AO, states that there is sufficient indirect evidence that Petitioner incurred PTSD as a result of his military service and that his misconduct may be mitigated by his experience of PTSD. 
  
BOARD 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, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, in light of enclosures (2) and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, relief in the form of changing his characterization of service to “Honorable,” and narrative reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority,” is warranted.    
  
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 
 
BORAD RECOMMENDATION  
 
That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected to show that on 15 April 1985, he received an “Honorable” characterization of service. 
  
That Petitioner’s naval record shall 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 is to be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 
 
4.  It is certified that 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.