DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7990-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy 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 (NR20180007990) (2) DD Form 149 (NR20180001229) (3) BCNR, Advisory Opinion, dtd 8 Mar 18 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), and in accordance with enclosure (1), the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) considered request for correction to the military record of his father, (deceased). , hereinafter “Petitioner,” was previously granted an upgrade to his discharge characterization to reflect an honorable discharge in consideration of the mitigating circumstances of his in-service mental health condition that impacted his conduct. His son’s request for reconsideration seeks the removal of derogatory items/comments from Petitioner’s record and a restoration of Petitioner’s rank prior to the disciplinary proceedings that resulted in discharge. Enclosure (1) was reviewed in accordance with Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F.Supp.2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). 2. The previous Board considered that he was suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), as evidenced by his post-service treatment record and determined an upgrade to his service characterization was appropriate. The current Board reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and applied liberal consideration in accordance with the guidance regarding discharge reviews for veterans who suffer from PTSD and/or mental health conditions. Ref. (b) - (d). The Board also reviewed Petitioner’s request in light of the Department of Defense’s most recent equity, injustice, and clemency guidance. Ref. (e). determined that the partial 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 records, enclosure (2), and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, the relevant AO, enclosure (3). 3. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 18 November 2019, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial 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 records, enclosure (2), and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, the relevant AO, enclosure (3). 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. It is in the interest of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty service on 30 November 1965. Petitioner deployed to Vietnam in 1966 as an infantry fire-team leader and participated in three different combat operations. d. On 3 May 1967, Petitioner was convicted at special court-martial (SPCM) for a period of unauthorized absence (UA) and sentenced him to confinement, forfeiture of pay, and reduction in rank to from lance corporal (E-3) to private first class (E-2). On 6 October 1967, he was convicted at SPCM for UA and sentenced to confinement, forfeiture of pay, and reduction in rank from Private first class (E-2) to private (E-1). On 8 March 1968, Petitioner was convicted at SPCM for UA and sentenced to confinement, forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). e. On 24 September 1968, Petitioner was discharged as a private (E-1) with a BCD. e. On 14 March 2018, the previous Board determined that Petitioner’s discharge should be upgraded to an honorable characterization of service. f. Petitioner now asks that his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis be taken into consideration as a mitigating factor in light of his loss of rank and the adverse information reflected in his record. He seeks the removal of the derogatory information from his service record as well as an upgrade to his rank to reflect the grade of lance corporal. g. The Board, in its review of Petitioner’s entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors including Petitioner’s PTSD diagnosis, and the conclusions of the favorable AO that was issued prior to the previous Board’s determination. CONCLUSION: The Board determined that Petitioner’s misconduct is mitigated by service connected PTSD and found that his application should receive liberal consideration. The Board concurred with the conclusions of the AO, and took particular note of Petitioner’s post-service diagnosis. The Board found that Petitioner’s mental health condition mitigated his actions, and that his service-connected mental health condition impacted his conduct, which ultimately led to the courts-martial proceedings that reduced him in rank. The Board noted that the interview between Petitioner and his son, which was submitted as part of the reconsideration request, was particularly compelling when determining that relief was warranted on the grounds of clemency. The Board determined that the removal of derogatory information from Petitioner’s record is not appropriate as it accurately captures the judicial proceedings to which Petitioner was subjected while he was in the Marine Corps. In view of the above, the Board recommends the following partial corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, to reflect the rank of lance corporal with a date of rank of 24 September 1968. That Petitioner be issued a new discharge certificate indicating the rank of lance corporal. That no further correction action 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 26 August 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. 11/27/2019