DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
   
Docket No: 1956-21 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:    Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO FORMER MEMBER  
      
 
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 PTSD,” of 3 September 2014    
        (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) PDUSD memo, “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,” of 25 August 2017 
        (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 with attachments 
       (2) Case summary 
 
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 changes to his discharge characterization, narrative reason for separation, separation code, separation authority, and reenlistment code. 
 
2.  The Board, consisting of Mr., Mr.  and Mr.  reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 6 August 2021 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined the 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 also considered the advisory opinion (AO) of a qualified mental health provider. 

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 review the application on its merits.  
 
   c.  Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 January 2000.  From January 2002 to April 2002, he was deployed to .  From December 2002 to July 2003, he was stationed in Kuwait as part of OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM. 
 
   d.  On 10 October 2003, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of cocaine.    
  
   e.  Subsequently, Petitioner was notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  After he waived his procedural rights, Petitioner’s commanding officer recommended Petitioner be separated with an other than honorable (OTH) character of service due to misconduct.  After the staff judge advocate determined the separation was sufficient in law and fact, the discharge authority directed Petitioner be discharged with an OTH character of service by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  Petitioner was discharged on 10 December 2003 and assigned a RE-4B (not recommended for reenlistment, in-service drug involvement and no potential for further service) reentry code. 
 
 f.  The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) found the OTH characterization inequitable after considering Petitioner’s overall capacity to serve, his mental/emotional stability, his post-service PTSD diagnosis, and the severity of his conduct.  The Secretarial Review Authority disagreed with the NDRB, noting there was no evidence the alcohol abuse issues and cocaine use were due to PTSD, and concluded the discharge was proper, with no change warranted. 
 
 g.  Petitioner contends the following: 
 
  (1) His discharge was an injustice because his service-connected PTSD and secondary alcohol use disorder were mitigating factors in his misconduct.  Petitioner contends he the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has diagnosed him with service-connected PTSD related to his deployment to Kuwait where he feared chemical attacks and his time at .  He contends that due to suffering from PTSD, he drank heavily to self-medicate.  One day, while his judgment was impaired by extreme alcohol use, he used cocaine.   
 
  (2) His discharge was an injustice because his service record warrants a general, under honorable conditions, character of service because his service was honest and faithful.  Petitioner contends he served three years and ten months of his four-year contract, received a Good Conduct Medal, and a Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal for his outstanding service which was reflected in his final proficiency/conduct marks of 4.6/4.3.   
 
  (3) He has endured the stigma of an OTH characterization for the past 17 years and, since his PTSD continues to be a source of instability in his life, he needs VA benefits that he is ineligible for due to his characterization.   
 
  (4) In support of his contention, Petitioner submitted two character references that were written at the time of his discharge by a Master Sergeant that supervised him for 23 months and a Marine instructor from Marine Corps Engineer School.   
  
 h.  As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO on 2 August 2021.  The AO confirmed Petitioner submitted supporting evidence of his VA diagnosis of service-connected PTSD and generalized anxiety disorder.  Based on the available evidence, the AO concluded the preponderance of indirect evidence indicates Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with PTSD incurred as a result of his military service, and his in-service misconduct could be mitigated by his experience of PTSD.  
 
CONCLUSION: 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  The Board reviewed the application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e).   
 
The Board, applying liberal consideration and relying upon the favorable AO, determined there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner suffered from PTSD at the time of his military service and his misconduct should be mitigated.  The Board specifically noted the Petitioner’s misconduct of cocaine use, even though Petitioner did not specifically contend he used cocaine to self-medicate, was mitigated because he suffered from undiagnosed PTSD which led to excessive alcohol use in an attempt to self-medicate and indirectly led to his cocaine use.  The Board also noted Petitioner’s proficiency/conduct marks of 4.6/4.3 which warrant an honorable character of service.   
 
Additionally, in the interest of justice, the Board further determined Petitioner’s narrative reason, separation code, and separation authority should be changed to “secretarial authority.”  However, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice in the assignment of a “not recommended for reenlistment” reentry code and concluded Petitioner’s request for a reentry code “to correspond with discharge” warranted only the removal of the “B” from the “RE-4B” in order to remove the stigma of his in-service drug use.    
 
RECOMMENDATION: 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 and discharge certificate indicating his characterization of service as “honorable,” narrative reason for separation as “secretarial authority,” separation code as “JFF1,” separation authority as “MARCORSEPMAN 6421,” and reentry code as “RE-4.”   
   
That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 
 
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. 

8/28/2021
Executive Director