Docket No: 4370-19 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 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) Case summary 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted sailor, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) requesting the Board correct his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) to reflect a change to his characterization of service, narrative reason for separation, and reentry code. 2. The Board, consisting of , , and reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 August 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined the 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 naval service records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 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 14 March 1986. On 16 September 1987, he was evaluated by psychiatry due to having difficulty adjusting and dealing with authority and provisionally diagnosed with personality disorder. On 4 November 1987, Petitioner was psychiatrically evaluated and immature, impulsive personality traits were noted. On 23 June 1988, he was diagnosed with a personality disorder and had follow-on meetings with a psychologist on 28 and 29 June 1988. On 30 June 1988, he received nonjudicial punishment for disrespect toward a noncommissioned officer. Subsequently, Petitioner was notified of pending administrative separation proceedings with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), characterization of service by reason of convenience of the government due to physical or mental condition. After Petitioner waived his procedural rights, the discharge authority directed Petitioner’s discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to physical or mental condition with a GEN characterization of service. On 5 August 1988, Petitioner was discharged by reason of personality disorder. d. Petitioner contends the underlying basis of his separation was procedurally defective at the time of his discharge because the Commanding Officer must provide reasonable time to overcome deficiencies, and there was never a substantiated finding that Petitioner was unable to be productive. Petitioner also contends the adverse action, to include the administrative discharge, was unfair because “the discharge was substantially deficient” and there was no “fully determined reason to initiate the elimination.” Further, he contends the command did not allow him to “fix the problem.” Additionally, the Petitioner contends the general characterization of service is “inequitable now” and does not “serve a further purpose.” Lastly, Petitioner contends the “entirety of his military career” should be considered as well as the “compelling affidavit” he submitted. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants relief. The Board carefully reviewed Petitioner’s application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered each of Petitioner’s contentions. The Board considered his contention that the underlying basis was procedurally defective but determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice in administrative process. The Board also considered the contention that the administrative discharge was “unfair.” Specifically, the Board considered Petitioner’s contention he was not afforded an opportunity to “fix the problem” and noted Petitioner was first evaluated by a mental health professional in September 1987 and had at least five appointments between that time and his discharge. Lastly, the Board considered Petitioner’s affidavit, records, and his contention a GEN characterization of service is no longer “equitable” but noted the absence of the “personal letters of support” listed as supporting documents in counsel’s memo and the lack of post-service documentation of Petitioner’s “successful life since being involuntarily separated.” The Board determined there was insufficient evidence to establish an error or injustice in the GEN characterization of service Petitioner received. In light of the potential for future negative implications, the Board 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 indicating the 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. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 22 April 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.