ex-FA, USN
ND06-01017

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:  				20060728     
Narrative Reason for Separation:			
Character of Service:				
Discharge Authority:				MILPERSMAN 1910-124     
Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge:	SIMA SAN DIEGO, CA     

Applicant’s Request:
	Narrative Reason change to:		HARDSHIP     
	Characterization change to:		NOT APPLICABLE
	Review Requested:			
Representation:  					

Decision:

Date of Decision:					20070621
Location of Board:				Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:				
Complete Medical Record:			
Complete Discharge Package:			

Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:	
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:	

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

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)				19970422-19971229 COG
Active:        		               		NONE

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  				19971230     
Years Contracted:  				;        
Date of Discharge:				19990825
Length of Service:				01  Yrs  07  Mos  26  Days  (does not exclude lost time, if any)
Time Lost During This Period:			NONE

Education Level:  				
Age at this Enlistment:  				19
AFQT:  						55
Highest Rate/Rank:				FA

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):  NONE

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

19980506:	Applicant joined for duty aboard USS FRANK CABLE (AS-40), Homeport: Guam.

19981217:	Applicant TEMDU to COMNAVMARIANAS TRANSITPERSU.

19990105:	Applicant married in Hagatna, Guam, to M_ S. B_, active duty member of U.S. Navy.
	[Extracted from RED/Dependency Application dated 199900107.]

Not dated:	Applicant began using married name on official documents.

19990326:	Applicant joined for duty with SIMA, San Diego.

19990410:	Counseling:  Applicant counseled on Navy Family Care Policy, received Family Care Plan Checklist, Information and Referral Packet.  Family Care Plan due date 19990725.

19990609:	Applicant gave birth to dependent daughter.
	[Extracted from RED/Dependency Application dated 19990713.]

19990712:	Applicant submitted signed Family Care Plan Certificate with Blocks 1-7, 9-11 marked “Do Not Comply;” Family Care Plan Arrangements form with Blocks 1-4 marked “Do Not Comply;” and Family Care Plan Checklist marked “Do Not Comply.”

19990712:	Applicant certified in writing having been counseled on, and acknowledged understanding of, Navy policy on dependent care responsibilities and potential consequences for failure to make and maintain adequate Family Care Plan.  Applicant certified that she was not worldwide available and had completed OPNAV Form 1740/6 affirming that she was not available.  

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

Record not available.

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Discharge Process:				NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE
Date Notified:					19990811
Reason for Processing:				CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - 
Least Favorable Characterization:			

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		19990811
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel			
Administrative Board			
Obtain Copies	  			
Submit Statement(s)			
GCMCA Review				

Administrative Board Date:			NOT APPLICABLE
Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	HONORABLE (990812)
Separation Authority (date):			BUPERS PERS-254 (NOT FOUND IN RECORD)
	Narrative reason directed:			NOT FOUND IN RECORD	
	Characterization directed:			NOT FOUND IN RECORD	 
Date Applicant Discharged:			19990825 

Additional Information Considered by Board

Type of documentation submitted by the Applicant and considered by the Board
       
       	Document Type					#Pages
       Related to Period of Service Under Review:
	Service/Medical Record:				1
	Other Period of Service:				0
       Related to Post-Service Period:
	Community Service:				0
	Education:					1
	Employment:					0
	Health/Medical:					0
	Character Statements:				0
	Criminal Records Checks:				0
	Additional Statements from Applicant:		0
        Other Documentation	 (Describe Below)		0

        Total Number of Pages:				2

       Description of Other Documentation:  NONE

Applicant’s Issues as Summarized by the Board:
1.  Discharge should be “hardship” because Applicant and spouse were due to deploy at same time and could not get childcare.

Decisional Issues:

Issue 1 ().  While the Applicant may subjectively feel that her situation constituted a personal hardship, the facts and circumstances of her case did not meet the criteria for a “Hardship” discharge under applicable regulations.  Rather, the facts and circumstances of the Applicant’s case fell squarely within the criteria for discharge based on “Convenience of the Government – Parenthood.”  No other narrative reason more accurately describes the reason why the Applicant was discharged from the Navy.  Therefore, no relief is warranted on this issue.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Board noted that the Applicant’s Notification of Administrative Separation indicated that she was entitled to an administrative discharge board; it should have been marked “not applicable” as the Applicant did not have 6 or more years of service.  The Notification also indicated that the Applicant’s right to GCMCA review was “not applicable” although the Separation Authority in her case was BUPERS Pers-254 because she had more than 1 year or more remaining on her obligated service.  BUPERS Pers-254 action was not found in the record; however, the Board found that the Applicant met the criteria for discharge on the basis of Parenthood and found no evidence of prejudice to the Applicant as a result of any procedural error or missing record.  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

Minority Opinion

Not Applicable.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 18, effective 12 Dec 1997 until 31 Aug 1998, Article 1910-124 (previously 3620215), 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.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 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.  

Board Membership:  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:

				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