Title: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Author: CAP
Last saved by: jennifer.miles
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND10-00177

ex-STG3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091020
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
	Narrative Reason change to:	HARDSHIP 

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USNR (DEP)	20000414 - 20000509  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20000510	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20010829	Highest Rank/Rate:  STG3
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   20 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  68
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  1.5 (2)	Behavior:  2.5 (2)	OTA:  2.91

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	NONE

Periods of UA/CONF:  	

NJP:  	SCM:  	SPCM:  	    CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20010719:	For failure to maintain an updated Family Care Plan as required by OPNAVINST 1740.4A  

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	

Related to Post-Service Period:
	Employment:		Finances:		Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Rehabilitation/Treatment:		Criminal Records:	
	Personal Documentation:		Community Service:		References:	
	Department of VA letter:		Other Documentation:	
		Additional Statements:
	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 33, effective 27 August 2001 until 
21 August 2002, Article 1910-124, 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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	Decisional issues: Applicant seeks change in narrative reason for discharge to Hardship, vice Convenience of the Government – Parenthood or Custody of Minor Children; the Applicant contends that she was told by her command that she would be separated pursuant to a hardship discharge.    

Decision

Date:  20110106		Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  .

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  

The Applicant enlisted in the U.S. Navy with an enlistment waiver granted by Commander, Navy Recruiting Command for her enlistment with three dependents.  The Applicant was further advised within the context of parenthood that all Navy personnel on active duty must be ready to deploy throughout the world on short notice and be able to fully execute their military and professional duties.  Moreover, the Applicant enlisted for a four-year commitment and then extended that enlistment for 24 months in exchange for guaranteed training in the advanced electronics/computer field – Sonar technician (surface) school program with a $10,000 bonus upon completion of her occupational specialty schooling.      

The Applicant’s record of service includes one 6105 retention-counseling warning regarding her failure to maintain an updated Family Care Plan as required by OPNAVINST 1740.4A and no nonjudicial or judicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  The Applicant’s record reflects completion of her guaranteed training program as the honor graduate, advancement to Petty Officer Third Class, and payment of her enlistment bonus as stipulated in her enlistment contract.  On 22 April 2001, the Applicant joined her fleet command to commence her tour of duty as directed.  On 27 April 2001, the Applicant signed her Department of the Navy Family Care Plan Certificate indicating that she could not comply with the requirements as set forth in OPNAVISNT 1740.4A.     

On 19 July 2001, the Applicant was advised of the proposed action recommending she be separated from the Naval service due to Convenience of the Government – Parenthood in accordance with paragraph 1910-124 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN).  When notified of the recommendation for administrative separation processing using the  procedure, the Applicant waived  rights to consult with a qualified counsel, did not elect to have a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review, but did elect to submit a written statement for the Separation Authority’s consideration.  Additionally, the Applicant acknowledged - in writing - that, if separated, she would be subject to a reimbursement requirement for recoupment of any bonuses or special pay she had received.  The chain of command positively endorsed the recommendation for separation and concurred with the recommendation that the Applicant receive an Honorable characterization of service upon her discharge.  

On 20 August 2001, the Separation Authority approved the recommendation for administrative separation and the Applicant was discharged under Honorable conditions with a re-enlistment code of RE-3B (Parenthood or custody of minor children a member is unable to perform prescribed duties, or unable to comply with family care plan requirements - Ineligible to reenlist without a Commander, Navy Recruiting Command waiver).  

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant seeks a change in the narrative reason for discharge to Hardship, vice Convenience of the Government – Parenthood or Custody of Minor Children; the Applicant contends that she was told by her command that she would be separated pursuant to a hardship discharge.

The record of evidence reflects the Applicant was separated by reason of Convenience of the Government due to Parenthood.  The Applicant enlisted in the Navy with a waiver for dependency and was fully aware of the obligations of military service on her family life.  Upon completion of her training, the Applicant was unable to comply with the requirements of a family care plan to enable her to be able to deploy throughout the world on short notice and to be able to fully execute her military duties.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  

In accordance with paragraph 1910-110 of the MILPERSMAN, the Applicant’s situation did not meet any of the requirements for a Hardship discharge.  In the Applicant’s personal statement to the Separation Authority, she stated that she was unwilling, not unable, to comply with the requirements of a family care plan; specifically, she was unwilling to put her children under the care of people she did not know and that she could not leave them again.  Pursuant to the Commanding Officer’s recommendation for administrative separation of 19 July 2001, the Applicant was unable to comply with the Navy Family Care Plan Policy after exhausting all of her options and was recommended for an Honorable discharge.  There is no evidence in the record indicating the Applicant had been counseled or awarded disciplinary action due to misconduct during her enlistment and her overall trait average was 2.91, warranting an Honorable characterization of service.  

Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety in the discharge action; the resulting narrative reason for separation was proper and remains appropriate.  Accordingly, the Applicant’s petition for relief is denied.  

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,  record entries, and the discharge process, the Board found   Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall   and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of  discharge.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service Conduct.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil.”

Additional Reviews:  After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct:  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate  in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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

Key:	NFIR - Not found in record 	UA - Unauthorized absence	NJP - Nonjudicial punishment	SCM - Summary court-martial
	SPCM - Special court-martial	FOP - Forfeiture of pay	RIR - Reduction in rank	EPD - Extra duties
	CONF - Confinement	CC - Civilian conviction	CCU - Correctional Custody Unit	BW - Confinement on bread and water

Key:	NFIR - Not Found In Record 	UA – Unauthorized absence	NJP – Nonjudicial punishment	SCM – Summary court-martial	
	SPCM – Special court-martial	FOP – Forfeiture of pay	RIR – Reduction in rank	EPD – Extra Duties 
	CONF – Confinement		B&W – Confinement on bread and water