Docket No: 11359-19 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:      Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF   
            
 
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 
    
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 upgraded character of service and his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) amended to reflect the “highest rank obtained.” 
 
2.  The Board consisting of  reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 5 March 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 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. 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 12 June 2000.  He served honorably during his first enlistment and was released from active duty at the completion of his required active service on 11 June 2004.  He most recently reenlisted on 19 September 2015.  
 
     d. During his active service, Petitioner served in OPERATION ANACONDA, OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM, and OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM on four separate deployments.   
 
     e. On 21 October 2016, Petitioner was convicted by general court-martial for two specifications of wrongful use of cocaine, wrongful possession of cocaine, adultery, violating a general order by wrongfully using drug paraphernalia, and endangering the welfare of his children by leaving cocaine unsecured in his home where his children could access it.  He was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), confinement, hard labor without confinement, forfeiture, and reduction in rank.  The appellate review documentation was not available in Petitioner’s record nor was a DD Form 214, but a review of his record confirmed the BCD was subsequently approved at all levels of review, and on 23 November 2017, Petitioner was discharged.   
 
     f. Petitioner contends he suffered from PTSD and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) which contributed to his actions and resulted in his discharge.  He further contends that he had “voids within [himself] that [he] filled with work, being number one or honor grad at school, competing with peers in a fast-paced Special Operations environment” and when those voids caused “distance from [his] wife and children,” he “filled the voids through alternative methods.”  In support of his contention, Petitioner submitted medical documents along with a personal statement for consideration by the Board.   
 
     g. As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO dated 8 February 2021.  The AO confirmed Petitioner suffered from PTSD and TBI stemming from military service, specifically combat operations with conventional and Special Operations forces from January 2002 through May 2013.  The AO further states Petitioner was a high performer without disciplinary problems prior to the onset of PTSD, which was well established by 2004 and documented in his military medical record and numerous deployment health assessments.  Further, Petitioner received recurrent psychiatric care to include combat stress group counseling, individual counseling, and psychotropic medication.  The AO stated the diagnosis should be considered as mitigating because Petitioner’s misconduct occurred after the traumatic events and involved maladaptive behaviors common in PTSD and TBI. 
   
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).   
 
The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying upon the favorable AO, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner’s PTSD and TBI mitigated the misconduct that led to his BCD.  Relying upon the guidance provided by the Wilkie Memo, the Board determined clemency, in the form of an upgrade of his characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions, was warranted.  However, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice to warrant changing Petitioner’s rank on his final DD Form 214.   
 
RECOMMENDATION: 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating his characterization of service as “general, under honorable conditions.”        
 
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.