DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 1856-13
2 December 2013
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR)
To: Secretary of the Nayy , co
Ref: (a) Title 10'U.S.C. 1552
Encl: {1) DD Form 149 dtd 29 Jan 13 w/attachments
(2) Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject,
hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written
application, enclosure: (1), with this Board requesting, in
effect, that her naval record be corrected by showing that on 31
October 1994, she was issued an honorable characterization of
service vice the other than honorable (OTH) discharge of record.
2. The Board, consisting of Mses. Barrow and Zivnuska and Mr.
Midboe, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice
on 26 November 2013. The majority of the Board, Ms. Barrow and
Mr. Midboe, voted for partial relief. The minority member of
the Board, Ms. Zivnuska, denied the application. Documentary
material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures,
naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies.
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 which were available under existing law
and regulations within the. Department of the Navy.
b.- Although it appears that enclosure (1) was not filed in
a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the
statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.
-geparation authority approved her=request for a discharge under
c.- Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and entered active duty
on 14 August 1990. Her record is incomplete, but she served.
satisfactorily until 3 February 1994, when she entered a period
of unauthorized absence (UA), which did not end until 193
September 1994, a period of 216 days. It appears that she
requested a discharge OTH conditions for the good of the service
to avoid trial by court-martial for the period of UA totaling
216 days. Prior to submitting this request, she would have
consulted with qualified military counsel and acknowledged the
adverse consequences of receiving such a Gischarge. The
4
i |
OTH conditions. On 31 October 1994, she was separated with a
discharge under OTH conditions for the good of the service to
avoid trial by court-martial. As a result of this action, she
was spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the
potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at
hard labor.
a. Petitioner now alleges that she was sexually assaulted
in 1991, and this is why she entered the period of UA in 1994.
She admits that she did not report the assault to authorities at
the time of the alleged offense.
MAJORITY CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
majority of the Board finds an injustice warranting partial
approval of Petitioner's request. The majority particularly
notes that she requested a good of the service discharge to
avoid trial by court-martial for a 216 day period of UA and does
not condone the misconduct. However, the majority believes that
she was raped, even though she did not report it at the time.
The majority concludes that the traumatic event eventually
caused her to enter the lengthy period of UA. The majority
finds that a fully honorable characterization of service is not
warranted in this case because of her misconduct. However, the
majority concludes that based upon her overall record of
service, relief in the form of a general characterization of
service is appropriate.
In view of the above, the majority recommends the following
limited corrective action:
MAJORITY RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that
on 31 October 1994, she was issued a general under honorable
conditions characterization of service vice the OTH discharge of
record.
2
b. That nor further relief be granted.
c. That any material or entries inconsistent with or
relating to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or
completely expunged from Petitioner’s record and that no such
entries be added to the record in the future.
d. That any material directed to be removed from
Petitioner's naval record be returned to the Board, together
witha copy of this Report of Proceedings;—for retention in a
confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross
reference being made a part of Petitioner’s naval record.
MINORITY CONCLUSION: .
The minority recommends that no relief be granted. The minority
bases this recommendation upon Petitioner’s lengthy period of UA
and request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial. The
minority particularly notes that she did not report the alleged
sexual assault at the time it occurred, and is just now stating
that it caused her to enter a lengthy period of UA.
Accordingly, the minority’s recommendation is as follows:
MINORITY RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's application be denied.
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.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J. GEORGE
Recorder Acting Recorder
5. The foregoing report of the Board is submitted for your
review and action.
Ww ‘DEAN 'PFET
ORITY REPORT .
Reviewed and approved: 4 { hy [4 | “ HW
5 , ROBERT L. WOODS
M ITY REPORT: Assistant General Counsel
‘enn, (Manpower and Reserve Affairs)
ntagon, Rm 4D548
. Reviewed Soo So Weshingten, DG 20350-1000 -
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2602 13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his characterization of service be changed. His commanding officer forwarded his case to the separation authority, who directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to homosexual acts, which was effected on 6 December 1954. c. Reference (b) sets forth the Department of the Navy’s policies, standards, and procedures for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05011-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08958-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10909-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling 226 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10956-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 2011. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for five periods of UA totaling 341 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7600 13
The Board, consisting of Mr. Zsalman, Mr. Grover, and Mr. Midboe, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 13 August 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. ‘The Board particularly notes that he received the Good Conduct Medal and this was his only offense during more than three years of service, Moreover Petitioner’s commanding officer recommended that he...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07610-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. The Board found that you entered active duty in the Navy on 15 July 1986. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04986-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2013. Documentary material considered by ,the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06084-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Your record shows that you served on active duty in the Navy from 13 January 1987 until 12 January 1989 when you were honorably discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09197-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...