DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 0741-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER USN, Ref: 10 U.S.C. § 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) OPNAV 1740/1, Department of the Navy Dependent Care Certificate (3) NAVPERS 1070/513 (Administrative Remarks), dtd 2 Mar 95 (4) Memo, subj: Notice of a Notification Procedure Proposed (5) DD Form 214 1. Pursuant to the provisions of the reference, Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that her naval record be corrected to change the narrative reason for her separation from “Parenthood or Custody of Minor Children” to “Hardship.” 2. The Board reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 9 September 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, the Majority recommended that the corrective action indicated below be taken. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of her naval service records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining 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. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 25 October 1993. d. On 1 March 1995, Petitioner indicated on enclosure (2) that she could not comply with the requirement to maintain a family care plan, and provided a memorandum explaining that she could not, and had no intention to, comply with this requirement because her mother’s medical conditions made her unavailable to continue providing care for her children. See enclosure (2). On 2 March 1995, Petitioner was counseled regarding her failure to maintain a family care plan. See enclosure (3). e. By memorandum dated 22 March 1995, Petitioner was notified that administrative separation procedures were being initiated for the convenience of the government on the basis of parenthood. Petitioner waived her right to consult with legal counsel and to a hearing before an administrative discharge board. See enclosure (4). f. On 21 April 1995, Petitioner was discharged with an honorable characterization of service. Enclosure (4) reflects that the reason for her separation was “Parenthood or custody of minor children,” and the separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 3620200.” See enclosure (5). g. In enclosure (1), Petitioner contends her mother provided care for her two minor children, but became gravely ill due to heart problems and diabetes. As a result, Petitioner’s mother needed Petitioner’s care, and was unable to continue caringfor Petitioner’s children. Petitioner provided three letters from this timeframe supporting this contention. Petitioner contends that she was told that that she qualified for, and would receive, a “hardship” discharge, but this was not listed as the narrative reason for separation on enclosure (5). Because Petitioner was discharged early after less than two years of service, she does not qualify for a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Guaranteed Home Loan.1 She asserts, however, that the time in service requirement to qualifyfor this benefit would be waived if she were discharged for “hardship.” h. Per MILPERSMAN 3620210 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel by Reason of Convenience of the Government on the Basis of Hardship), one of the criteria for a hardship discharge is that the severe hardship must be one not normally encountered and resolved by other members of the Naval Service. Additionally, a hardship discharge is voluntary and therefore must be requested by the service member. MAJORITY CONCLUSION: After careful and conscientious consideration, the Majority the Board found no errors in Petitioner’s early separation for “Parenthood or custody of minor children,” but did find an injustice that warrants partial relief. Specifically, the Majority determined that the collateral consequence of Petitioner’s early separation for a reason other hardship, namely her ineligibility for the VA Guaranteed Home Loan benefit due to circumstances beyond her control, combined with the representations made to her that she would qualify for and/or receive a “hardship” discharge, represents an injustice. Although the Majority found the consequences to be an injustice, it also determined that Petitioner did not meet the criteria fora “hardship” discharge. Accordingly, the Majoritydetermined that Petitioner’s reason for separation should be changed to “Secretarial Authority.” MAJORITY RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Majority of the Board recommends the following corrective actions: That Petitioner’s DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflecting that the narrative reason for her separation was “Secretarial Authority,” her separation authority as “MILPERSMAN 3630900”, her separation code was “JFF,” and her RE-Code was “RE-1.” That no further changes be made to Petitioner’s record. That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. That, upon request, the VA be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 14 January 2020. MINORITY CONCLUSION: The Minority of the Board found no error or injustice in Petitioner’s early separation for “Parenthood or custody of minor children.” In reaching this conclusion, the Minority found that Petitioner’s official reason for discharge was consistent with Navy policy, and that Petitioner failed to present any evidence supporting her assertion that she was submitted for or was informed that she would receive a hardship discharge. To the contrary, she was notified of the basis for her proposed separation in enclosure (3). Absent evidence that Petitioner was lead to believe that she would receive a hardship discharge, the Minority found no injustice in Petitioner’s reason for separation, or in the collateral consequence that she does not meet the time in service requirements to receive certain VA benefits. MINORITY RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Minority of theBoard recommends that Petitioner’s request be denied. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter. 5. The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your review and action. 1/13/2021 ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL (MANPOWER & RESERVE AFFAIRS) DECISION: MAJORITY Recommendation Approved (Partial Relief, “Secretarial Authority”)