Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00927
Original file (ND01-00927.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EN3, USN
Docket No. ND01-00927

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010716, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to "completed 4 years of service commitment". 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 020130. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an impropriety in the narrative reason for separation. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the reason for the discharge shall change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/ COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3620150. The separation Code shall change to : JBK. .

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. The narrative reason for my separation is listed on my DD214 as pregnancy or childbirth. It was the end of my 4-year enlistment. I had extended, NOT re-enlisted, for the BOOST Program, but I never got to start the BOOST Program, due to the navy's sexism against pregnant women who are unwilling to abort.

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

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     921123 - 921220  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 921221               Date of Discharge: 961220

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 00 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 13                        AFQT: 80

 Highest Rate: EN3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.93 (3)    Behavior: 4.0 (3)                 OTA: 3.93 (4.0 evals)
        3.0 (1)                   3.0 (1)                             3.0 (5.0 evals)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, Navy "E" Ribbon (2), SSR(3), MUC, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

HONORABLE/PREGNANCY OR CHILDBIRTH, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

921221:  Enlisted USN for a term of four years. Established expiration of active obligation service as 961220.
931217:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (alcohol abuse which resulted in incapacitation for the performance of duties), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.        

960704:  Confirmed Pregnancy.

 961009:  Performance Evaluation for period 96JUL26 - 96OCT09 indicates applicant was student under instruction in the Broadened Opportunity for Officer Selection and Training (BOOST) Program, but selection to the BOOST program been deferred until the commencement of the 97-98 academic year. Applicant transferred to another division within NETC, Newport, RI.
961220:  Applicant discharged with an Honorable by reason of convenience of the government due to "pregnancy or childbirth", having completing 4 years of active duty obligation.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961220 with an honorable 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 narrative reason for separation was improperly assigned (C and D).

 The applicant’s issue states: “The narrative reason for my separation is listed on my DD214 as pregnancy or childbirth. It was the end of my 4-year enlistment. I had extended, NOT re-enlisted, for the BOOST Program, but I never got to start the BOOST Program, due to the navy's sexism against pregnant women who are unwilling to abort.” The NDRB found the applicant fulfilled her military obligation and Honorably completed her enlistment. The NDRB’s vote was unanimous that the reason for discharge shall change to: “COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE”, Authority: MILPERSMAN 3620150.” Additionally, the separation Code shall be changed to: JBK. Relief is granted.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 13, effective 960624 - 961002), Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

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 " afls10.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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00447

    Original file (ND99-00447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880223 - 880516 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880517 Date of Discharge: 901009 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 04 23 Inactive: None After a thorough review of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00402

    Original file (ND99-00402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00402 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Character Reference letter of Jan 15, 1999 (family member) Character Reference letter of Jan 15, 1999 (family member) 2 Statements by the Applicant to the Board dated...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00085

    Original file (ND03-00085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, she was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. During the process of my discharge from the Navy, I was told that my discharge was going to be Convenience of the Government due to Pregnancy/or Childbirth. A review of the Applicant’s service record shows she did not meet the requirements to be discharged for misconduct due to commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01416

    Original file (ND03-01416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. [SERVICE RECORD DOES NOT CONTAIN APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR DISCHARGE DUE TO PREGNANCY.] As the discharge decision is presumed, under law, to be correct, the Naval Discharge Review Board may affirm the original decision even if official records which it would normally be required to review as part of the discharge review process cannot be located.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00590

    Original file (ND03-00590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AA, USNDocket No. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. [Signed by the Applicant]” ________________________________________________________________________ Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500839

    Original file (ND0500839.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Further, the Applicant implies through supporting documents, that due to her pregnancy and financial situation, her discharge should have been by reason of hardship. Pregnancy/Childbirth is the reason the Applicant was discharged. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization or narrative reason changes solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00635

    Original file (MD01-00635.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00635 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010406, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to hardship. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Applicant's DD Form 149 dtd 10-30-00 VA ltr to Applicant dtd Jul 14, 2000 denying education benefitsApplicant's Enrollment in the Marine Corps...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00947

    Original file (ND01-00947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00947 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010717, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, she was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "In September 1999, AA (Applicant) requested separation from the navy due to parenthood;...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01073

    Original file (ND00-01073.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-01073 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000920, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Pt not doing either of these. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 891215 with an Entry Level Separation (uncharacterized) due to pregnancy (A).

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00075

    Original file (MD03-00075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00075 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021010, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded...