DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1292-19 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 “Clarifying Guidance to MilitaryDischarge 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 of 10 Dec 19 (3) Petitioner’s rebuttal to the AO (4) Updated AO of 19 Jan 20 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his narrative reason for separation “Convenience of the Government, Condition not a physical disability, Personality Disorder determined by a medical board” and “RE-4” reentry code be changed. Petitioner contends that he was actually suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) not a personality disorder. Enclosures (1) through (4) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 9 June 2020, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial 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 Petitioner’s naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, post-service diagnosis, the 10 December 2019 advisory opinion (AO) provided by a Navy mental health professional (MHP), which was previously provided to the Petitioner, Petitioner’s rebuttal, and the updated AO of 19 January 2020. 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 interests of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 29 June 1987. On 7 March 1990, he was counseled concerning his lack of maturity, initiative, and motivation. On 9 April 1990, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobeying a lawful order by wearing his jungle boots to formation. During the period from 24 May 1991 to 18 September 1991, Petitioner participated in Operation . On 25 June 1992, he was counseled concerning his display of suicidal gestures, by inflicting multiple lacerations to both of his forearms with a razor. On 2 July 1992, he was counseled concerning his repeated display of suicidal gestures. On 6 July 1992, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder. On 8 July 1992, his case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that he be honorably discharged from the Marine Corps by reason of convenience of the government due to his diagnosed personality disorder. On 22 July 1992, Petitioner received an honorable discharge due to his diagnosed personality disorder. d. On 3 October 2018, Petitioner petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) seeking to change his reentry code from RE-4. In his personal statement, he contends the personality disorder diagnosis was in error and he should have been diagnosed with PTSD, which he stated aDepartment of Veterans Affairs (VA) physician diagnosed “within the past 8 or so years” before the BCNR petition. Petitioner contends it was apparent that, after serving overseas in and the , he was suffering from severe depression, and, rather than treat the condition, he was discharged and not even given any type of assistance or direction from his command. He has since received treatment and rebuilt his life, earned both a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree, and has been very successful. He would like to serve his country again, but with his RE-4reentry code, it is impossible even though he served honorably. e. As part of the review process, a Navy MHP reviewed Petitioner’s contentions and the available records and issued enclosure 2, the 10 December 2019 AO. A review of available service medical records revealed a psychiatric hospitalization at from 15-17 June 1992, after presenting to a local emergency room with superficial lacerations to both forearms and suicidal ideation. He was treated and discharged to full duty with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder and recommended for administrative separation. He was also seen by his medical officer in sick call for insomnia on 22 June 1992. The AO noted that there is no information in his military service record that he was diagnosed with PTSD or other major psychiatric conditions other than borderline personality disorder. The AO found that, based on the available evidence, there is insufficient evidence of a diagnosis of PTSD attributable to Petitioner’s military service that may have mitigated Petitioner’s reentry code determination. f. Enclosure (3) is a rebuttal to the AO received on 16 January 2020. Along with the rebuttal, Petitioner included mental health treatment notes from September 2010 to December 2010, in which he was evaluated “to determine need for treatment for ‘personality disorder.’” Following the evaluation, he was diagnosed with PTSD. g. Enclosure (4) is the updated 19 January 2020 AO provided by a Navy MHP. The AO noted that the Petitioner submitted evidence from a VA psychologist that he has a diagnosis of PTSD that should be attributed to military service. This psychologist opined that the Petitioner’s symptoms resulting in a personality disorder diagnosis were actually symptoms of PTSD. The AO concluded that it is possible to attribute some of the Petitioner’s symptoms to PTSD rather than personality disorder. h. Petitioner’s request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to MilitaryBoards 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, and especially in light of enclosure (4), the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. Additionally, 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 these policies. In this regard, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, to include his participation in Operation Desert Storm and his post-service diagnosis of PTSD by the VA, the Board found that there is evidence to attribute Petitioner’s diagnosed PTSD to his military service. The Board concluded that his Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) should be changed to read that the narrative reason for his discharge was “Secretarial Authority” to eliminate the possibilities of invasive questions. The Board also decided to change Petitioner’s separation code to “JFF1” and his separation authority to “MARCORSEPMAN par 6214.” The Board voted not to change his RE-4 reentry code. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. RECOMMENDATION Petitioner’s naval record is corrected to show that on 22 July 1992, his narrative reason for discharge was “Secretarial Authority,”his separation code was “JFF1, and his separation authority was “MARCORSEPMAN par 6214.” 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 16 January 2019. 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 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.