DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
       
Docket No: 0594-19       
Date:  Ref Signature 
 
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  

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of the reference, Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting an upgrade to her service characterization as reflected on her Report of Separation from Active Duty (DD Form 214) for her period of active-duty service from 7 July 1992 to 23 November 1994.  

2.  The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 11 March 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosure, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval service 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 available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy.

    b.  Although the enclosure 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on 7 July 1992.  On 8 July 1992, Petitioner was counseled regarding her retention in naval service despite her defective enlistment.  On 15 January 1994, Petitioner underwent a medical examination following her assertion that she had been sexually assaulted.  From the period beginning on 24 January 1994 to 28 January 1994, Petitioner received medical and psychiatric treatment as a result of the sexual assault.  On 8 August 1994, Petitioner was notified of the initiation of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  Petitioner elected counsel and asserted her procedural rights.  On 6 September 1994, Petitioner signed a stipulation of fact acknowledging that, in December 1993, prior to the sexual assault, she engaged in consensual sex and performed oral sex in her barracks room, and that both acts were recorded.  On 7 September 1994, an administrative discharge board (ADB) convened and determined that Petitioner committed misconduct by reason of commission of a serious offense (consensual sodomy).  The ADB recommended that Petitioner be discharged with a general characterization of service, to be suspended for 12 months.  On 21 October 1994, Petitioner’s commanding officer concurred with the recommendation of the ADB with exception of the 12-month suspension of her discharge.  On 16 November 1994, the discharge authority concurred with the commanding officer’s recommendation.  Subsequently, Petitioner was discharged with a general characterization of service on 23 November 1994.  A service record entry reflects that Petitioner’s final trait average was 3.46.  

    d. Petitioner contends that her discharge was too severe, and her offense was looked at for her rape trial.  Petitioner states she did not have a pattern of misconduct, and she has been a good citizen since her discharge. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board noted that the evidence submitted in the court-martial trial of the Sailors accused of Petitioner’s sexual assault was used as the basis of the offense for which she was subsequently discharged.  In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that Petitioner’s discharge was too severe, especially for adult consensual sodomy, which, by itself, is no longer an offense.  Further, the Board considered Petitioner’s service record and final performance marks, which were sufficient to receive an honorable characterization of service.  As a matter of justice, the Board found that Petitioner is entitled to an upgrade of her discharge characterization to “honorable.” Additionally, in the interest of justice, the Board concluded that Petitioner should receive further relief in the form of corresponding changes to her separation code, separation authority, and narrative reason for separation.  

In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That Petitioner’s be issued a new Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) indicating her characterization of service as “honorable,” narrative reason for discharge as “secretarial authority,” SPD code as “JFF,” reentry code as “RE-1J” reenlistment code, and separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 1910-164.” 

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 14 December 2018. 

4.  Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)), 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 Regulations, 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 the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.  


3/18/2020