DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1145-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 (b) SECDEF Memo of 3 Sep 14 “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD” (c) PDUSD Memo of 24 Feb 16 “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI” (d) PDUSD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “ClarifyingGuidance 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” Encl:(1) DD Form 149 (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 13 Nov 19 1. Pursuant to reference (a), Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his general characterization of service be upgraded to honorable. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of the naval records, post-service medical diagnosis, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board also considered, enclosure (2), an advisory opinion (AO) provided by a mental health professional. 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 2 August 1960. On 23 January and 16 May 1963, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for assault, and 10 days of unauthorized absence (UA). On 27 August 1963, Petitioner was the subject of a Physical Evaluation Board, which found him unfit to perform the duties of his rate because of a physical disability (Schizophrenic reaction, Hebephrenic type, in remission). Petitioner’s case was forwarded to the separation authority, and on 25 September 1963, the Chief of Naval Personnel directed that he be discharged from the Navy due to a physical disability with severance pay. On 4 October 1963, he received a general discharge due a physical disability. c. Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks assigned on a periodic basis. Petitioner’s conduct average was 3.06. At the time of his service, a conduct average of 3.0 was required to be considered for a fully honorable characterization of service. d. With his application, Petitioner alleges that at the time of his discharge, he was sick in the hospital, when officials asked him if he wanted a discharge, and he said that he did. He assumed that his discharge would be honorable, but found out recently that it was general (under honorable conditions). He contends that at the time of his discharge, he was taking mega doses of mind-altering drugs, and he cannot even remember the details of his discharge or his hospital stay. He believed he was discharge because of a service-connected disability, he had served honorably, and that through no fault of his own, had become disabled and honorably discharged. e. Enclosure (2), the Advisory Opinion states that on 27 August 1963, a PEB met to review the Petitioner’s records and found him unfit to perform the duties of his rate because of physical disability, Schizophrenic Reaction, Hebephrenic Type (in remission) #3001. The disability was, found to have incurred while entitled to receive basic pay, not due to intentional misconduct of willful neglect, and was not, incurred during a period of unauthorized absence. The disability was, deemed the proximate result of active duty and was ratable at 0% by the Standard Schedule for Rating Disabilities in use by the Department of Veterans Affairs for 9201 Schizophrenic Reaction, hebephrenic type, and that the disability may be permanent. The AO notes that the disabling condition, which led to his discharge, had worsened over the intervening 55 years, and is now rated as a 100% service-connected disability. The AO concludes that during his military service, Petitioner did develop a severe psychiatric disorder, Schizophrenic Reaction, Hebephrenic Type that rendered him unfit for service and resulted in his medical discharge from the Navy. The AO also concludes that the development of this disorder could have negatively affected his behavior. Based on the available evidence, the AO opines that there is documented evidence of a severe diagnosed mental health condition that arose during his military service that could have negatively affected his behavior. f. Petitioner’s request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board 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" memorandum of 25 August 2017. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, especially in light of enclosure (2), and the fact that heattained the required average in conduct, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (d). Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy and concluded that it was. In this regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record of service, to include the fact that he attained the required average in conduct, his in-service diagnosed physical disability, Schizophrenic Reaction, Hebephrenic Type (in remission), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s characterization of service should be changed to “Honorable.” In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. RECOMMENDATION Petitioner’s naval record is corrected to show that on 4 October 1963, he received an “Honorable” discharged. 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 be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. Upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs is informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 8 January 2019. 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 reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.