DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S COURTHOUSE ROAD SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7565-19 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 (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) USD memo of 25 Jul 18, “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 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), and in accordance with enclosure (1), the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR or Board) considered Petitioner’s request for correction to his military record. The Board’s consideration also included a review of Petitioner’s available service records, enclosure (1). 2. Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, requests that BCNR upgrade his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to an honorable characterization of service. Petitioner states that he was seeing a counselor at the time of his discharge from the Marine Corps, and that he was suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Board reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and applied liberal consideration in accordance with the current guidance regarding discharge reviews for veterans who suffer from PTSD and/or mental health conditions. References (b) - (d). The Board also reviewed Petitioner’s request in light of the Department of Defense’s most recent equity, injustice, and clemency guidance. Reference (e). 3. The Board, consisting of , , and reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 17 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 enclosure (1), relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval service record, court filings made by Petitioner regarding his requests for relief from the Department of the Navy, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 4. 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 Marine Corps in November 1987, and began a period of active duty on 10 August 1988, as part of the delayed entry program. On 29 August 1991, Petitioner reenlisted the Marine Corps for a period of five years. On 4 March 1993, Petitioner was evaluated by the Department of Psychology, Naval Hospital . His medical notes reflect an Axis I diagnosis of PTSD (Existed Prior to Entry). Petitioner was subsequently processed for a six-month limited duty board. d. On 27 July 1993, Petitioner failed his fourth physical fitness test (PFT). Subsequently, on 18 August 1993, Commanding Officer, Combat Service Support Detachment 21, recommended that Petitioner be discharged by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties, specifically failure to conform to minimal acceptable physical fitness levels. e. On 18 October 1993, the staff judge advocate reviewed the recommendation for Petitioner’s administrative separation on the basis of unsatisfactory performance, and found it sufficient in law and fact. Petitioner was discharged from the Marine Corps on 28 October 1993, on the basis of unsatisfactory performance of duties. Petitioner received a general characterization of service and a reentry (RE) code of RE-3P. f. Petitioner requests an upgrade to his discharge characterization and asks that the Board take into consideration the fact that he had been diagnosed with PTSD, was seeing a counselor, and was being processed for a six-month Limited Duty Board at the time of his separation. g. The Board, in its review of Petitioner’s entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the Petitioner’s in-service treatment for PTSD, his Temporary Limited Duty Board processing, and the nature of his unsatisfactory performance (PFT failure). The Board noted that on 7 July 1993, Petitioner’s Limited Duty Coordinator noted that Petitioner’s condition and stated, “(n)o running, PFT, contact sports. May swim, participate in marching or humps.” On 27 July 1993, Petitioner failed his fourth PFT since December 1991. h. The Board reviewed Petitioner’s request under the guidance of references (b) - (e). The Board noted that Petitioner’s unsatisfactory performance of duties was not due to misconduct, but rather an inability to comply with expected physical fitness standards. Additionally, the Board noted that Petitioner received a general characterization of service, which is not an adverse discharge characterization. CONCLUSION The Board found that Petitioner’s inability to meet physical fitness expectations was mitigated by a mental health condition, specifically PTSD, with which he was diagnosed on 4 March 1993. The Board noted that Petitioner’s PTSD was diagnosed as having existing prior to entry. Nonetheless, the Board found that given the nature of Petitioner’s mental health condition at the time of his military service, the lack of misconduct in his record, and his limited duty status; that as a matter of justice, Petitioner is entitled to an upgrade to his discharge characterization, and a change to his narrative reason for separation and the corresponding SPD code. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), to show he was discharged with an honorable characterization of service, and that his narrative reason for separation and corresponding SPD code be changed to “Secretarial Authority” and “JFF,” respectively. That no further corrective action should be taken. 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 29 July 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.