Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00940-01
Original file (00940-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0 TRG

Docket No: 940-01
19 July 2001

From:
To:

Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy

Subj:

REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD  

ON

Ref:

Encl:

(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject's naval record

Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a

1.
former enlisted member of the United States Navy filed enclosure
(1) with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to
show entitlement to the Montgomery G. I. Bill (MGIB).

The Board, consisting of Mr. Cooper, Mr. Lightle and Mr.

2.
McPartlin, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 17 July 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record.
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes,

regulations and policies.

Documentary material

The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining

3.
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.

Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.

.

Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 17 March 1998 at age

She then served in an

On 1 August 2000 she was

an: elected to participate in the MGIB.

21 
excellent manner for over 28 months.
notified of separation processing by reason of convenience of the
government due to pregnancy.
authority directed an honorable discharge and the assignment of a
Separation Program Designator (SPD) of  
that her discharge was involuntary.
on 11 August 2000.
shows that she was assigned an SPD of KDF which indicates here
discharge was voluntary.
At the time of discharge she had
completed 2 years, 4 months and 25 days of active service.

However, the DD   Form 214 issued at that time

On 1 August 2000 the discharge

"JDF", which indicates

She was honorably discharged

d.

On 3 October 2000 the discharge authority sent a letter
to the Navy Personnel Command which states, in part, as follows:

. 

. (Petitioner) requested to be separated from the U.
She is married to a sailor
To avoid administrative

. 
S. Navy due to pregnancy.
onboard USS ARCTIC (AOE 8).
separation of both service members due to parenthood, I
separated her locally.
complying with the Dependent Care Certificate once the
child was born, therefore separation for Pregnancy was
warranted.

(She) did not intend on

The letter concludes by stating the discharge was honorable with
an SPD code of KDF.

e.

Petitioner is not eligible for the MGIB because she did

Further, there is no
not complete 30 months of active duty.
provision in the law which would allow Petitioner's $1,200 MGIB
However, she would be eligible
payment to be refunded to her.
for prorated payments under the MGIB based on her almost 29
months of active service if her separation was involuntary. As
previously noted, the SPD of KDF indicates that her discharge was
voluntary. Therefore, she is being denied all MGIB benefits. An
SPD of JDF would indicate that her separation was involuntary and
she would be entitled to at least 28 months of MGIB benefits.

f.

Petitioner states that she was unaware of the 30 month
service requirement and could have served another 35 days if she
Therefore, she is requesting that
had known of the requirement.
her record be corrected to show an additional 35 days of service.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
Concerning her request for an additional 35 days of
active duty, the Board concludes that the facts of this case did
not warrant such relief, which would give her pay and allowances
for that period.
apparently requested discharge,
requested discharge, she eventually would have been processed for
an involuntary separation due to her inability to provide a valid
Given the circumstances, including
dependent care certificate.
her satisfactory record of service, the Board concludes that
Petitioner's SPD should be changed to JDF so that she can obtain
at least 28 months of MGIB benefits.
RECOMMENDATION:

However, the Board notes that although she
it appears that had she not

a.

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that

2

on 11 August 2000 she was assigned a Separation Program
Designator (SPD) of JDF vice the SPD of  

KDF now of record.

b.

That her record for additional service be denied.

That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's

C .
naval record.

It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's

4.
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.

-1

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder

Acting Recorder

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
has been approved by the Board on
authority of reference (a),
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

-Xx&
%W. DEAN PFEIFFER

Executive Director

3



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01045-02

    Original file (01045-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an 1. enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that the reason for her discharge from the Navy be changed to hardship so that she will be eligible to receive Montgomery G.I. discharge, it appears that had she been properly advised and remained on active duty until the birth of her child, on 5 June 1994, she would be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00398-02

    Original file (00398-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record From: To : Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy filed an application with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show that she was separated by reason of hardship vice pregnancy or childbirth. e. The Board is aware that Petitioner is not eligible for the MGIB because she did not complete 30 months of active duty, and there is no provision in the law...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00155-01

    Original file (00155-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TUR Docket No: 155-01 22 June 2001 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL OF RECORD ggasiisieninscaiiiiiiaiaiiiiiiliaas Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that the appropriate relief is a change in Petitioner's SPD code from KDG to JDF so that she may obtain pro-rata MGIB benefits based on her 20 months...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03216

    Original file (BC-2004-03216.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS asserts that, based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority. As the applicant presents no facts warranting a change to her SPD code, denial is recommended. On 3 Feb 03, she requested discharge from active duty due to pregnancy and separated on 1 May 03...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04691-02

    Original file (04691-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TRG Docket No: 15 November 2002 4691-02 Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy RECORD OF (a) Title 10 U.S.C. that her separation was involuntary, and she would be entitled to 29 months of MGIB benefits. including her good record of service and the fact that she was within 27 days of qualifying for MGIB, the Board concludes that Petitioner's SPD should be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10871-02

    Original file (10871-02.PDF) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (b) BUPERSINST 1900.8 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, 1. former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting, in effect, to change her job title, reenlistment code, and reason for separation to establish eligibility for Montgomery G. I. However, Petitioner's record does not contain the latest primary Navy Reference (b) states Yt listed on uty (DD Form h. Petitioner is not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10977-02

    Original file (10977-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Mr.--Mr.d.lIlband -reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 July 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. The record should then show that, on 5 December 1996, she began terminal leave and remained in that status until she was honorably discharged by reason of pregnancy/childbirth on 26 December 1996 with two years, six months of active...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00384

    Original file (BC-1998-00384.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her discharge from the Air Force should be changed to a release from active duty. The fact that she was honorably discharged rather than released should not, in and of itself, preclude her from future military service.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800384

    Original file (9800384.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her discharge from the Air Force should be changed to a release from active duty. The fact that she was honorably discharged rather than released should not, in and of itself, preclude her from future military service.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800384

    Original file (9800384.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her discharge from the Air Force should be changed to a release from active duty. The fact that she was honorably discharged rather than released should not, in and of itself, preclude her from future military service.