Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND04-01386

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
                     DISCHARGE REVIEW
                   DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND04-01386

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040902.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050224.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PREGNANCY OR CHILDBIRTH, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-112.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To be able to find a job after graduating college.”  

2.  “I’m upgrading my discharge, because, when I was discharged, the chief I worked for at the time informed me of my discharge being honorable.  I did nothing wrong at the time of my discharge therefore, I respectfully request an upgrade.”  

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214 Member-4
Applicant’s DD Form 214 Member-1

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	981217 - 990111	COG
		   USNR (DEP)	970212 - 970808	ELS
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990112		Date of Discharge:  011212

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  11  01		[Does not exclude lost time]
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NER, AFSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  50

NMA* - No marks available for review

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PREGNANCY OR CHILDBIRTH, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-112.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

010123:	Applicant to UA and missed movement.

010211:	Applicant from UA.

010213:	Applicant to UA and missed movement.

010314:	Applicant from UA.

010504:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence from 010123 to 010211; Unauthorized absence from 010213 to 010314.  Article 87:  Missing movement on 010213.
	Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month(s), restriction and for 60 days, RIR to E-2.  RIR susp. 6 mos.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010806:	Punishment awarded and suspended on 010504 vacated due to continued misconduct.

010806:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Failure to obey a lawful written order by having sexual intercourse on board USS George Washington (CVN 73) on one or more occasions between on or about May 2001 to July 2001.
	Award: 60 days restriction and RIR to E-1.  RIR susp. 6 mos.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010912:	Applicant requested to be “discharged from the Navy.”

010924:	Applicant requested to be “released from active due to pregnancy.”  

011212:	Commanding Officer directed the Applicant's general (under honorable conditions) discharge by reason of convenience of the Government due to pregnancy. 

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20011212 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to pregnancy or childbirth (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded, based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Relief is not warranted.

Issue 2.  The Applicant states, “the chief I worked for at the time informed me of my discharge being honorable” and “I did nothing wrong at the time of my discharge.”  The Applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service.  A general discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86, 87 and 92 of the UCMJ, to include an authorized absence of 40 days. Violations Articles 87 and 92 are considered serious offenses.  Further, unauthorized absences in excess of 30 days are considered serious offenses.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to her discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 33, effective 27 Aug 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-112, Separation by reason of Convenience of the Government - Parenthood.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.  The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness.  You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil”.

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.