DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10073-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER MEMBER 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 PTSD,” of 3 September 2014 (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) PDUSD 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) 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 with attachments (2) Case summary (3) Advisory Opinion, Docket No: NR20190010073 of 28 Dec 2020 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 to reflect an honorable character of service and changes to his narrative reason for separation on his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). 2. The Board consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 February 2021 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined 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 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 and Petitioner’s rebuttal to the AO. 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 Marine Corps on 28 November 2005. Between 1 February 2008 and 18 February 2010, Petitioner was formally counseled seven times for disobeying orders, being placed on the body control program (BCP), disrespect toward a commissioned officer and two noncommissioned officers, unauthorized absences on multiple occasions, being disrespectful in language, and unsatisfactory performance by not being able to maintain height and weight standards. d. Petitioner’s record is incomplete in that it does not contain all the documents pertaining to his administrative discharge, but based on his DD Form 214, it appears that after being afforded all of his rights, the separation authority directed discharge with a general, under honorable conditions, by reason of unsatisfactory performance. Petitioner was discharged on 23 April 2010. e. Petitioner contends his struggle with weight, which led to his discharge, was a direct result of a mental health condition. Specifically, he contends the following: 1) His failure to meet height and weight regulations that led to his discharge was a direct result of his service-connected depression and anxiety. 2) He was subjected to several incidents of hazing and when he responded or refused to follow unlawful orders, Petitioner contends he was subjected to harassment and retaliation. Petitioner further contends that if the Marine Corps’ updated policy on hazing and harassment had been in place when he was in service, incentive and grounds to report the harassment would have been available to Petitioner. Instead, he contends he was continually subjected to hazing and harassment his entire time in service. 3) Errors were made in the administration of the command’s BCP, which were prejudicial to Petitioner. Specifically, he contends he met the standards multiple times while on a BCP extension but was told each time by his command that he would not be processed out of the BCP until he met standards at a specific date. Petitioner further contends he was denied leaving the BCP as a form of harassment from his command. Additionally, he contends the command’s failure to acknowledge his attempt to meet regulations caused his depression to worsen. 4) He suffered from a mental health condition, persistent depressive disorder, during his service with symptoms of low energy, poor concentration and feelings of hopelessness that may have incorrectly caused him to seem indifferent. Petitioner contends that characterizing his service as unsatisfactory performance is inequitable based on his mitigating health conditions. 5) An advocacy letter was submitted for consideration. f. As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO dated 28 December 2020. The AO confirmed that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) diagnosed Petitioner with anxiety disorder, dysthymia disorder, social phobia, ADHD and an eating disorder in July 2012. In February 2013, a VA Compensation and Pension Evaluation diagnosed him with dysthymia and anxiety disorder and stated the depressive, anxiety, and eating disorder symptoms were present during Petitioner’s military service. Based on the available evidence, the AO concludes there is sufficient indirect evidence Petitioner incurred a mental health condition as a result of his military service and that his poor performance may be mitigated by a mental health condition. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). Even applying liberal consideration and relying on the AO, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice warranting an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions, to an honorable characterization of service. The Board, noting the numerous counseling entries Petitioner received for misconduct, concluded Petitioner’s service has been appropriately characterized as general, under honorable conditions. However, applying reference (e), the Board determined Petitioner’s narrative reason, separation code, and separation authority should be changed to “secretarial authority.” RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating his narrative reason for separation as “secretarial authority,” separation code as “JFF1,” and separation authority as “MARCORSEPMAN 6421.” That 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. Executive Director