DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 ‘TRG
Docket No: 3210-08
27 June 2008
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 June 2008. your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice,
You enlisted in the Navy on 31 August 1999 at age 24. At that
time, your mother had custody of your three year old daughter.
Subsequently, your mother became ill and could no longer care for
your daughter. On 12 June 2000, you indicated that you could not
comply with the terms of the Family Care Plan Certificate. Since
you were unable to deploy, you were notified of separation
processing by reason of parenthood. At that time, you elected to
waive your procedural rights. On 14 November 2000, the discharge
authority approved the recommendation of your commanding officer
that you be honorably discharged by reason of parenthood. You
were honorably discharged on 12 January 2001. At that time, you
were assigned an RE-3B reenlistment code.
Subsequently, you were granted a waiver and were allowed to
enlisted in the Navy Reserve. Since then you have served in an
excellent manner and have been advanced in rate.
You contend in your application, that the discharge by reason of
parenthood is in error because you should have been discharged by
reason of hardship. You believe that the reason of parenthood
implies that you were discharged because of pregnancy or
childbirth which does not apply in your case.
It is clear from the record that after your mother became ill
there was no one you trusted to care for your child while you
were deployed. This situation is no different from the problems
faced by many single parents and it is not considered to be a
hardship. It is Navy policy to separate individuals in your
Situation by reason of parenthood and you have been treated no
differently than many others.
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-3B or an RE-4 when an
individual is discharged by reason of hardship. Accordingly,
you received the least restrictive reenlistment code authorized
by the regulations.
warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Executive D r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03539-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2003. Subsequently, you requested discharge because you had no one to care for your daughter. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05566-05
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012850
A memorandum, undated, contained in the applicant's military personnel file, shows the applicant requested a hardship discharge due to the premature birth of her daughter. It states that the SPD code MDG is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 6-3b(1), by reason of parenthood. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of record shows the applicant was separated due to hardship, but the specific reason for the...
NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00559
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 | BCNR | CY2001 | 07857-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 18 February 2000. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reason for the assignment of the RE-3B reenlistment code. That...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02990-04
After your discharge, you were rated as 10% disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs.In your application you are requesting that the SPD code be changed to “JDG”, which will indicate that you were discharged by reason of parenthood or custody of minor children and your discharge was involuntary. Further, there is no evidence that a discharge by reason of physical disability was warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500477
The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to “from KDG to KDH Hardship.” The Applicant requests a documentary record review. ET3 B_ (Applicant)’s mother is already caring for 2 of her own children in addition to ET3 B_ (Applicant)’s child. The summary of service clearly documents that parenthood was the reason the Applicant was discharged.
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500775
ND05-00775 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050404. I was there for the Navy 24/7, please be there for me this one final time. The summary of service clearly documents that parenthood or custody of minor children was the reason the Applicant was discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02000-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Furthermore, the RE-3B code is the most favorable code that may be assigned when an individual is separated due to parenthood, and can be waived to allow reenlistment for active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07171-00
The Board also notes that even though Petitioner's trait averages differ on his enlisted performance record and his performance evaluation, both marks exceed the required average of 2.0 which is needed for a The Board further fully honorable characterization of service. notes Petitioner's only performance evaluation of record in which he was recommended for retention and promotion and believes that the sole reason for separation was due to him being nondeployable because he could not find...