DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7086-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Senior Medical Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 1 May 2020 (3) Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 12 May 2020 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to place him on the disability retirement list and upgrade his characterization of service to Honorable. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 9 July 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, relevant portions of 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. Petitioner entered active duty with the Navy in June 2014 and completed his initial training pipeline without incident. After being assigned to , he experienced a psychological incident in August 2015 that required his medical evacuation and treatment at Naval Medical Center. In January 2016, Petitioner was determined to be medically fit for duty and assigned to another ship. However, he expressed suicidal ideations on 22 February 2016 that required additional mental health treatment. He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder on 29 February 2016 and recommended for administrative separation for condition not a disability. After receiving counselling, Petitioner was discharged on 26 Jul 2016 for condition not a disability and assigned a General characterization of service. Post-discharge, Petitioner was diagnosed with chronic Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Psychotic Disorder in 2018. c. In correspondence attached at enclosures (2) and (3), the office having cognizance over Petitioner’s request to be placed on the disability retirement list determined that the evidence supports partial relief. The opinion states the evidence supports a finding that Petitioner was unfit for continued naval service due to Chronic Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. The opinion further states that a 10% rating is appropriate based on the limited occupational impairment evident in his record. Petitioner was provided a copy of the advisory opinion for comment on 14 May 2020. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting relief. In this regard, the Board concurred with the Advisory Opinions at enclosures (2) and (3). Specifically, the Board determined that the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that Petitioner was unfit for continued naval service due to Chronic Adjustment Disorder with a 10% rating. The Board agreed with the advisory opinion rationale for assigning a 10% rating based on documented performance that shows Petitioner was performing his assigned duties at or above fleet standards despite his symptoms. Similarly, the Board did not find Petitioner’s post-discharge diagnoses probative based on the time elapsed between his discharge from the Navy and the diagnoses. In their opinion, too many potential intervening factors exist to be able to reliably apply those diagnoses to his active duty service. As a result, the Board relied on Petitioner’s performance evaluations that documented a minimal occupational impairment at the time. In addition to changing Petitioner’s narrative reason for separation to disability, the Board concluded his characterization of service should also be upgraded to Honorable. By all indications, Petitioner performed his duties honorably and without misconduct. He met the performance trait average standard for assignment of an Honorable characterization of service and was recommended for promotion 11 days prior to his discharge from the Navy. After applying liberal consideration to the facts of the case, the Board determined the interests of justice merit upgrading Petitioner’s characterization of service to Honorable. RECOMMENDATION In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by changing his narrative reason for separation to disability with severance pay and his characterization of service to Honorable, with associated changes to his record consistent with this change. Petitioner will be issued a new DD Form 214. 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 theBoard’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.