DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 1681-19 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 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 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” (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) USD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “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” (e) USECDEF Memo of 25 Jul 2018 “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Advisory Opinion of 6 Feb 20 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service be changed to Honorable. Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of ., reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 10 July 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 her husband’s naval records, applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, post-service diagnosis, and enclosure (2), an advisory opinion (AO) provided by a Navy mental health professional, which was previously provided to the Petitioner. 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 1 March 1990. On 7 December 1990, he was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of 54 days of unauthorized absence. On 26 December 1990, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. After being afforded his procedural rights, he elected to waive his rights to consult with counsel and to have his case heard by an administrative discharge board. On 8 January 1991, his case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that he receive an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to the commission of a serious offense. On 14 January 1991, the separation authority directed that Petitioner be separated from the Marine Corps with an OTH discharge due to misconduct. On 24 January 1991, he was discharged from the Marine Corps with an OTH characterization of service for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. d. Petitioner contends that during his service, he was confused, and his mind was not right, so he was placed on medical hold, then discharged. His erratic behavior was misdiagnosed, and he was hurriedly discharged under OTH conditions, rather than being provided treatment for his mental incapacities. He now has memory loss, and he cannot recall the details of the incident that led to his OTH discharge. e. As part of the review process, the BCNR Mental Health Professional, a medical doctor and a Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, reviewed Petitioner’s contentions and the available records and issued the AO at enclosure (2). The AO noted that although Petitioner received several mental health diagnoses while in service, the most appropriate diagnosis was Adjustment Disorder as all his presenting stressors were life circumstances. The AO concluded that, in light of the consistent lack of any disturbance in his thought processes on serial examinations, it is less likely than not that Petitioner’s misconduct could be primarily attributable to his military service, or that his Adjustment Disorder may have risen to the level of mitigating his misconduct. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. Additionally, the Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by these policies. In this regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record of service, and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, the Board voted to grant Petitioner relief by changing his characterization of service to “General (under honorable condition).” 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 20 March 1992, he received a “General (under honorable conditions)” characterization of service. Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 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 11 February 2020. 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.