Docket No: 7694-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER, , USMC, XXX- XX Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (b) SECDEF Memo, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/ Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” of 3 September 2014 (Hagel Memo) (c) PDUSD Memo, “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI,” of 24 February 2016 (d) USD Memo, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and 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,” of 25 August 2017 (Kurta Memo) (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 w/attachments (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 16 Nov 20 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 his other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service be upgraded to general or honorable. Further, that the separation authority, separation code, and reentry code be change along with the narrative reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority.” Enclosures (1) and (2) applies. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 4 January 2021, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial 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 considered an advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health provider, which was previously provided to Petitioner. 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 27 August 1982. c. On 23 April 1984, Petitioner was assigned to a Urinary Surveillance Program. d. On 30 April 1984, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of marijuana. e. On 20 June 1984, Petitioner completed a one-day Substance Abuse Education Class. f. On 18 July 1984, Petitioner completed another 1-day Substance Abuse Education Program and was to be assigned to first available 30-day Program class. g. On 18 July, Petitioner again received NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. h. On 6 September 1984 Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge proceedings due to drug abuse. Petitioner waived his rights, including his right to an Administrative Discharge Board. On 15 August 1984, Petitioner’s case was forwarded to the separation authority stating, in part, that Petitioner refused to comply with Marine Corps policy regarding drug abuse. It was noted that Petitioner had actually expanded his drug usage to include cocaine as evidence by a urinary surveillance test conducted on 28 June 1984. It was recommended that Petitioner receive an OTH discharge due to drug abuse. i. On 6 September 1984, Petitioner was released from the Urinary Surveillance Program due to his failure to show progress in accordance with Marine Corps directives, and was afforded the opportunity to make a statement. i. On 17 September 1984, a Staff Judge Advocate reviewed Petitioner’s case and found it to be sufficient in law and fact. j. On 19 September 1984, the separation authority directed that Petitioner’s discharge from the Marine Corps with an OTH characterization of service due to drug abuse. k. On 28 September 1984, Petitioner received his OTH discharge for misconduct due to drug abuse. l. On 15 December 2010, the Board reviewed Petitioner discharge with no change. The Board concluded that the factors presented were not sufficient to warrant re-characterization of his discharge given the seriousness of his misconduct. m. Petitioner states through counsel that he suffers from a diagnosed case of service-connected Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and that PTSD was a contributing factor to the misconduct which led to his separation from the Marine Corps. n. The enclosed AO states in part, that based on the available evidence, there is sufficient indirect evidence that Petitioner incurred PTSD as a result of his military service and that his misconduct may be mitigated by his mental health condition of PTSD. BOARD CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s request warrants partial favorable action in the form of relief. The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e) intended to be covered by this policy. In this regard, the Board noted Petitioner’s misconduct, and does not condone his actions. However, based upon Petitioner’s overall record, in light of enclosure (2), and given our current understanding of mental health conditions, relief in the form of his characterization of service should be changed to “General (under honorable conditions),” and that the narrative reason for separation read “Secretarial Authority.” In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. BORAD RECOMMENDATION That Petitioner’s naval record shall be corrected to show that on 28 September 1984, he received a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. That Petitioner’s naval be further corrected by changing the narrative reason for separation to read “Secretarial Authority,” That the separation authority read “MARCORSEPMAN par 6214.” That the separation code read “JFF1.” That the Petitioner be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214). No further action be granted. A copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 4. It is certified that 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.