Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01252
Original file (ND99-01252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND99-01252

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990930, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000530. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety but did discern inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was three to two that the character of the discharge shall change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/ PARENTHOOD, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-124.






PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. Before I got out of the navy, the personnel working on my discharge told me that I was getting a General Under Honorable discharge due to a technicality, but that the discharge would automatically upgrade after 6 months. After my discharge I contacted Veterans Affairs who then told me I had to submit a request for an upgrade. Would have made it a career had conditions not changed. The Navy had always been my dream, and I served proudly from start to finish. Therefore, I respectfully request an upgrade of my discharge to Honorable. Thank You.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (4 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     940815 - 950710  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950711               Date of Discharge: 981016

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 06
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 49

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.0 (1)     Behavior: 3.0 (1)                 OTA: 3.0 (5.0 eval)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, AFM (w/Bronze Star)

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PARENTHOOD, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-124.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960916:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: bringing discredit upon naval service.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
[ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT IN SERVICE RECORD AND UNABLE TO OBTAIN FROM APPLICANT OR PREVIOUS COMMAND] .




PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 981016 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of parenthood (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 but inequitable (C and D).

In response to issue 1, the Board, after reviewing the applicant’s incomplete service record, found that the discharge received by the applicant is not warranted. The Board determined that the applicant’s performance evaluation averages warrant an upgrade to honorable.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 21, effective 01 Sep 1998 to Present, Article 1910-124 (previously 3620215), Separation by reason of Convenience of the Government - Parenthood.
B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 " afls14.jag.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:

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




Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00712

    Original file (ND00-00712.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00712 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000515, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to an involuntary separation. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00158

    Original file (ND02-00158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Bill I was denied, so I am respectfully requesting to change my discharge code from convenience of Navy/parenting to a hardship discharge code so I will be able to receive my benefits.. I recommend that she be separated from the naval service by reason of parenthood with a Honorable Discharge." PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991012 with an honorable by reason of convenience of the Government due to parenthood (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00440

    Original file (ND03-00440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    011121: Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [AZ2 C_ (Applicant) reported to HS-5 on 15 February 2001 for her first sea duty assignment. ]020322: CNPC directed the Applicant's discharge by reason of convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children with a characterization of type...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00570

    Original file (ND01-00570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000718 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children (A). The applicant requested a discharge upgrade in order to obtain GI Bill benefits. Relief denied.Although the applicant had no other issues, after careful review of the applicant’s service record, the Board determined that the applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00404

    Original file (ND02-00404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00404 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020215, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reenlistment code change from RE-4 to RE-1. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01067

    Original file (ND01-01067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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).The applicant requested a change in the character of her discharge in order to secure veteran’s benefits. The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant. The applicant did not provide any of these documents.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00559

    Original file (ND03-00559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I have given the Navy eight flawless years of active duty service and because I have made accommodations for my prior dependency issues, I have been granted the honor of enlisting in the Navy Reserves. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20000728 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00475

    Original file (ND04-00475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00475 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040128. 001122: Commanding Officer recommended discharge with an honorable by reason of commission of a serious offense and convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children. 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: The Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00688

    Original file (ND04-00688.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In addition to that mistake or however it is stated I find that although I completed the terms of my contract to receive my Navy collage fund I am unable to get it due in addition to the under honorable conditions in my dd214. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01451

    Original file (ND03-01451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, I have directed that SM3 S_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service with a general discharge (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to parenthood. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions for violating the UCMJ, Article 86, thus substantiating the misconduct.The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her...