Docket No: 250-20 
 
 
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:    Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF   
             
 
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 
    
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 her naval record be corrected to reflect an Honorable characterization of service. 
 
2.  The Board, consisting of  and  reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 24 May 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 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 considered the 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.  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 entered a period of active duty in the Navy at the age of 19 on 11 April 1994.  On 4 November 1995 she entered a period of unauthorized absence (UA) which lasted until 29 November 1995 when she was apprehended by civilian authorities.  In a message dated 13 December 1995 Petitioner’s Commanding Officer stated Petitioner was apprehended during a period of UA and that she assaulted the Master-at-Arms when turned over to the ship by shore patrol.  Petitioner was referred for a psychiatric evaluation and placed in-patient for evaluation and treatment from 29 November 1995 to 5 December 1995.  During this time she actively participated in therapy, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings, and addiction groups.  On 5 December 1995 Petitioner was diagnosed with Alcohol dependence, Personality Disorder NOS with Antisocial and Narcissistic features.  The treating provider recommended Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment, to continue in aftercare for one year with attendance at AA or other support groups three times per week.  Petitioner received Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 7 December 1995 for three specifications of UA; and 5 specifications of assault on a Senior Chief Petty Officer, and disrespect in language toward a Senior Chief Petty Officer, Chief Petty Officer, First Class Petty Officer, and Second Class Petty Officer.  On 7 December 1995 Petitioner was notified of administrative separation processing by reason of Convenience of the Government due to personality disorder and by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  She was afforded her procedural rights, but elected not to consult with counsel, and waived an administrative separation board.  Petitioner was discharged on 11 January 1996 with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service.  On 19 May 2000 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied Petitioner relief. 
 
     d.  Petitioner contends prior to her NJP she was experiencing several personal issues to include domestic abuse, alcoholism, and the health issues that led up to the death of her Grandfather.  She states she was raised by her Grandfather and was denied emergency leave when he became very ill.  Consequently, these issues led to her having a mental breakdown and going UA.  She further contends before these issues transpired she was a career oriented sailor who had hopes of becoming a commissioned officer.  Petitioner further states she was calm when apprehended and brought back to her ship until her superior paraded her in handcuffs through a full mess deck and then began shoving her up a narrow staircase.  She states she slipped, and that’s “when it all changed.”  She contends she found herself alone in a room with her face pushed down on the floor and placed in 4 point restraints.  She states she “triggered” because her father severely whipped her with a belt for years while he was blackout-drunk and her hands were pinned to her back.  She states she was in fight or flight mode, and it was impossible to recognize in that state that she was interacting with a superior.  She only saw an abuser that she needed to protect herself from.  She states she needed to get away from those men, was alone, and under duress.  Petitioner states being denied leave was the root cause of the situation, and she just needed assistance at that time with her unbearable grief. 
 
     e.  Petitioner’s personal statement described her post-service accomplishments to include earning an Associate’s degree in Liberal Arts and Criminal Justice, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Justice Studies.  She further stated her mental health and alcohol abuse is now under control and that she has “the Navy to thank for that.”  Furthermore, the NDRB in its review of Petitioner’s application noted the following evidence:  continuing educational pursuits to include transcripts, diplomas, degrees, and vocational-technical certificates; a verifiable employment record; documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; and proof of a sober lifestyle to include a detoxification certificate and AA meeting attendance.   
 
     f.  As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health provider reviewed Petitioner’s assertions and available records and provided an AO dated 26 February 2021.  The AO noted that no information was provided to indicate the in-service personality disorder was diagnosed in error.  Further, the AO concluded that there was insufficient evidence of any additional mental health conditions attributable to Petitioner’s military service which may have mitigated her misconduct. 
 
CONCLUSION: 
 
The Board reviewed Petitioner’s application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e).  Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief and that her characterization of service should reflect General (Under Honorable Conditions).  
 
The Board applied liberal consideration to Petitioner’s contentions and also considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is warranted in the interests of justice.  The Board found Petitioner’s contentions credible and supported by the documentation provided in the psychiatric narrative summary.  Furthermore, Petitioner’s final enlisted performance evaluation average was well above that required for a characterization under honorable conditions at the time of her discharge.  Accordingly, as a grant of clemency and in the interests of justice, the Board finds Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. 
 
RECOMMENDATION: 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: 
 
Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating her characterization of service as “General (Under Honorable Conditions).”          
 
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. 
 
6/11/2021

Deputy Director