Docket No: 11602-19 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:    Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER MEMBER  USN,  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 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 characterization of service and a “secretarial authority” narrative reason for separation.  
 
2.  The Board consisting of  reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 10 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 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 Navy on 13 June 2005.  On 19 May 2008, he began a period of unauthorized absence, which ended on 3 March 2009.  On 26 March 2009, after waiving his right to consult a qualified military lawyer, Petitioner requested discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial.  The discharge authority approved his request, and Petitioner’s Commanding Officer was directed to discharge him with an other than honorable (OTH) character of service.  He was discharged on 16 April 2009.   
 
 d.  Petitioner, who was diagnosed with major depressive disorder while in-service, contends his misconduct was attributable to his mental health condition.  Specifically, he contends:   
 
  1) His UA was not a result of his own willful actions but was a symptom of his major depressive disorder and, absent his depression, such conduct would not have occurred.   
 
  2) Due to the errors surrounding his treatment and his honorable post-service conduct, equity and justice demand that his discharge be changed to reflect his honorable service.    
 
  3) He experienced difficulty with two sailors on  who repeatedly harassed him over a two-year period but his exemplary performance continued despite the harassment which had begun taking a toll on his mental health.   
 
 e.  As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO.  The AO confirms Petitioner was diagnosed in-service with major depressive disorder.  The AO notes that, in his request for discharge, Petitioner expressed he was depressed and had difficulty obtaining mental health treatment and “felt like going UA was better than killing myself.”  Further, the AO states it is not uncommon for persons who suffer from depressive symptoms to use avoidance as a maladaptive way of coping with the feelings, as well as avoiding the purported abusers in an effort to alleviate the symptoms.  Based on the available evidence, the AO concludes there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with a mental health condition during his military service and his misconduct may be mitigated by his mental health condition.   
 
CONCLUSION: 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  The Board reviewed the application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e).  Specifically, the Board considered whether the application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy. 

The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying on the AO, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner suffered from a mental health condition that mitigated his misconduct.  In the interest of justice and in light of the potential for future negative implications, the Board further 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 and new discharge certificate indicating the characterization of service as “honorable,” narrative reason for separation as “secretarial authority,” separation code as “JFF,” and separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.”  
 
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 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. 
 
2/23/2021
Executive Director