Docket No: 6286-19 
Ref:   Signature Date                                                                                                  
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:    Commandant of the Marine Corps 
 
Subj:  REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER , USMC,  
           
Ref:   (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552 
                 
Encl:  (1) DD Form 149 with attachments 
       (2) Case summary 
       (3) Subject's naval record (excerpts) 
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) requesting a change to his naval record, specifically, to reflect his Characterization of Service be changed from “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” to “Honorable.”  He also impliedly requested that his Narrative Reason for Separation be changed from “Personality Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority” on his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).  Enclosures (1) through (3) apply. 
 
2.  The Board consisting of      , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 19 August 2020, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval 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 waive the statute limitation and review the application on its merits. 
 
    c.  According to the information in the record, Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 7 January 1976.  On 29 November 76, he received non-judicial punishment for a period of unauthorized absence totaling six days.  On 22 October 1976, Petitioner received a psychiatric evaluation, which diagnosed him with “hysterical character disorder, chronic, severe.”  As a result, he was recommended for an administrative separation due to a personality disorder. Petitioner’s record is incomplete in that it does not contain all the documents pertaining to his administrative separation.  Notwithstanding, presumably, he was notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of convenience of the government COG due to a personality disorder.  It is further presumed that his commanding officer (CO) then recommended discharge due to a personality disorder, with general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  The discharge authority approved the CO’s recommendation, and on 7 January 1977, he was discharged with a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service, and assigned a Narrative Reason for separation as “Personality Disorder.”  The Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers, and in the absence of substantial evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Petitioner, the Board presumes that the Petitioner was properly discharged from the Marine Corps.  In regard to the Petitioner’s case, there was no documentation in the record and he provided none, to support his contention that a medical board discharged him with an “Honorable” Characterization of Service. 
 
    d.  Regarding Petitioner’s contention that he is receiving 100% service connected disability from the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA), the Board noted that the DVA only has the authority to determine Petitioner’s eligibility for DVA benefits.  The Board also noted that the decision of the DVA does not have the authority or ability to change his naval record.  Regarding his contention that he received a good conduct medal while on active duty, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to his contention.  The record clearly shows that Petitioner served a total of 1 year and 19 days on active duty making him ineligible for the good conduct medal.  
 
CONCLUSION: 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants only partial favorable action.  The Board was sympathetic to the Petitioner medical condition and his desire to upgrade his discharge, however, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief.  The Board notes that Petitioner, does however, deserve clemency, and concludes that the narrative reason for separation should be changed to “Best Interest of the Service.”  Accordingly, the Board concludes that the Narrative Reason for Separation “Personality Disorder,” should be changed to “Secretarial Authority” and the Characterization of Service “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” will remain unchanged.   
   
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 
 
RECOMMENDATION: 
 
That Petitioner's naval record shall be corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority”. 
     
That Petitioner is issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).     

That no further changes be made to the record. 
 
That upon request, the DVA be informed that Petitioner’s application was received on 18 June 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 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. 
 
Sincerely,