Docket No: 4983-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER , USN, XXX- XX 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 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, “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 (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 25 Aug 20 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) requesting that his general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable due to a mental health condition. Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 16 October 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that 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 an advisory opinion (AO) furnished by qualified mental health provider, which was previously provided to Petitioner. (Enclosure (2)) Although Petitioner was afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal, Petitioner did not do so. 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 11 March 1997. On 12 January 1998, medical personnel diagnosed Petitioner with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and that this disorder would significantly impair his ability to perform in the Navy. As a result, it was strongly recommended that Petitioner be expeditiously administratively separated from the Navy. c. On 27 January 1998, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of other designated mental condition. Petitioner waived his right to counsel or to submit a statement on his behalf. d. On 5 February 1998, Petitioner’s discharge was approved and on 15 May 1998, he was discharged. At the time of his discharge he was issued a Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) that indicated a general under honorable conditions (GEN) character of service and condition, not a disability narrative reason for separation. e. In his application, Petitioner contended he discovered that he suffered from Bipolar Disorder while enlisted. Petitioner also noted that the condition directly attributed to his discharge, and while it progressively worsened if left untreated, if his condition was properly treated, he could have been a productive Sailor. g. The AO noted that Petitioner’s in-service records revealed psychiatric diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse based on serial psychiatric evaluations and constant observation by inpatient psychiatric staff during his psychiatric hospitalization, but there was no evidence of additional mental health disorders during his hospitalization, disciplinary procedures, or administrative processing. The mental health professional opined that, based on the available evidence, there is insufficient evidence of a mental health condition attributable to Petitioner’s military service that may have mitigated Petitioner’s behavior and performance. The mental health professional also noted that additional evidence, such as medical records containing a diagnosis of a mental health condition associated with his military service and linked to his military performance is required to render an alternate opinion. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action in the form of relief. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). The Board noted that a characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks assigned on a periodic basis. The Board was unable to find any military or civilian offenses that would result in Petitioner receiving lowered conduct marks, which in turn could have precluded an honorable character of service. The AO notwithstanding, the Board felt that continuing to characterize Petitioner’s as GEN was an injustice. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. RECOMMENDATION Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating an honorable character of service. Petitioner be issued a honorable discharge certificate. No further action be granted. 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 Regulation, 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.