From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:       Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER PVT XXX-XX, USMC 
  
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)  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/enls  
            (2) Advisory opinion of 9 Jun 21 
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting his under other than honorable (OTH) discharge be upgraded to honorable, and narrative reason for separation changed to “Secretarial Authority” due to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  He also impliedly requested that the separation authority and separation code be changed.  Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 
  
2.  The Board, consisting of Mr. , Mr. , and Mr.  reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 23 August 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 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta 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) furnished by 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.  Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 5 June 1970. 
 
     c.  Petitioner served a period of Vietnam service from 7 February 1971 to 20 April 1971.   
 
     d.   On 12 May 1972, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment for 27 days of unauthorized absence (UA), and failure to obey an order.   
 
     e.  On 16 October 1972, Petitioner was counseled regarding his conduct, and advised that further misconduct could result in being recommended for administrative discharge action.   
 
     f.  On 10 November 1972, Petitioner was convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of  
92 days of UA.  He was sentenced to reduction in paygrade, a forfeiture of pay and confinement. 
  
     g.  On 25 September 1973, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) violations of a written order. 
  
     h.  On 1 November 1973, Petitioner was convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of wrongful possession marijuana.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and a reduction in paygrade.  Additionally, his driving privileges and government operators permit was revoked.  
  
     i.  On  14 January 1974, Petitioner received NJP for four days of UA. 
 
     j.  On 18 January 1974, Petitioner was notified of administrative discharge action by reason of unfitness due to numerous periods of UA and frequent involvement with military authorities. After being afforded his procedural rights, he elected to waive his right to have his case heard before and administrative discharge board. 
  
     k.  On 1 April 1974, Petitioner’s case was forwarded to the separation authority stating, in part, “Although unconfirmed, indications are that SNM is still using marijuana and recently was involved in assaulting another Marine (White).” It was recommended that he be separated from the Marine Corps by reason of unfitness. 
 
     l.  On 15 April 1974, a staff judge advocate review and determined that Petitioner’s case was sufficient in law and fact. 
     m.  On 7 May 1974, the separation authority directed that Petitioner receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 
 
     n.  On 10 May 1974, Petitioner was discharged from the Marine Corps with an OTH characterization of service. 
 
     o.  With his application, Petitioner asserts he experienced PTSD in-service, his quality of service, request liberal consideration under Hagel and Kurta memos, that is PTSD excuses, mitigates, and outweighs his misconduct, and his discharge is unjust because of the quality of his service.   
  
     p.  Enclosure (2), states that based on the available evidence, there is sufficient evidence Petitioner exhibited behaviors associated with PTSD during his military service and his misconduct may be mitigated by his PTSD.         
   
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, given our current understanding of mental health conditions, and especially in light of enclosure (2), relief in the form of his characterization of service should be changed to “General.”  The Board also vote to change Petitioner’s narrative reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority.”  
  
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. 
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214, showing that on 10 May 1974, he received an under honorable conditions character of service.   
 
That the narrative reason for discharge was “Directed by the Secretary of the Navy to Correct Official Records.” 
 
That the separation authority to read “MARCORSEPMAN par 6012.1g.” 
 
That the separation code to read “JFF2.” 
 
That no further action be granted. 
 
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.   

9/5/2021
Executive Director