Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00669
Original file (ND99-00669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USNR-R
Docket No. ND99-00669

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990421, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Charlotte, NC. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000306. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was 3 to 2 that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630800.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.       Discharged with an other than honorable discharge my conduct at the time was the reason I received the type of discharge that I did. The time period surrounding the action that was taken for me I believe was a very difficult period. Things were happening in my personal life that I felt needed my attention. I was also very young and not use to the type of responsibility I was given and even more so not completely aware of my contract obligations with the Armed Force. Since that time I have matured rapidly and more susceptible to responsibility and commitments I've made, your consideration in upgrading my discharge will aid me in getting better job and be more productive to society. I regret the decisions I mad and only hope that you see fit to grant my request. See enclosed documents supporting my character and commitment.
2.       Request for Release from Department of Navy denied. Release would have allowed for voluntary enlistment into U.S. Air Force. Reason for request was "A" school denial that was previously granted.
3.       I understood the Naval Reserve would order me to active duty for not participating in drills. I missed more drills that I could make up, given the allowable make up drills.
4.       I received the other than honorable discharge from the "SAM" program of the US Naval Reserves. I believe to be unfair, I was a good soldier or sailor, and I did not know this decision was being made without a hearing in which I was present.
5.       The matter of discharge was not discussed between myself and my superiors, my CO and or XO. I was not given the chance to do my 24 mos of active duty, instead I received the discharge.
Documentation
In addition to the service record which did not include a Discharge Package, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character Reference Letter from sister
Character Reference Letter from Chaplain
Copy of Enlisted Performance Evaluation Report
Copy of Enlisted Performance Record (2pgs)
Copy of Record of Naval Reserve Service (2pgs)
Copy of Navy Occupation/Training and Award History (2pgs)
Copy of Enlisted Classification Record (2pgs)
Copy of Letter of Appreciation
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of Discharge Certificate
Copy of Letter from BCNR

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 840627               Date of Discharge: 881008

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 03 06
         Inactive: 00 04 19

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 72

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.70 (2)    Behavior: 3.70 (2)                OTA: 3.60

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Sharpshooter 4.5 pistol

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630800.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

840627:  Enlistment contract into the USNR documents acknowledgement of the requirement to participate in 48 scheduled drills and not less than 14 days of annual training per year for 8 years upon completion of initial active duty training.
880401:  Applicant stopped drilling [Extracted from case file].

 881003:  NMPC directed applicant’s discharge this date with other than honorable conditions due to unsatisfactory participation in naval reserve.
881008:  Discharged under other than honorable conditions for unsatisfactory participation in the ready reserves.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 881008 under other than honorable for unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve (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 discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

In the applicant’s issue 1 and 3, the Board found that the applicant signed a contract for 8 years and was required to fulfill this service obligation. The applicant states that he was not “aware of my contract obligations with the Armed Force.” The Board does not find this as a legitimate reason to upgrade his discharge. It was his duty and obligation to ask questions if there were concerns with his contractual obligation to the Navy. In addition, it is the Commanding Officer’s prerogative to order a Reservist to active duty for missed drills. The applicant had a track record for missed drills and the Commanding Officer took this into account when making this decision. Relief is denied.

In response to the applicant’s issue 2, the Board cannot make a determination concerning the applicant’s denial of a request for an A-school. This is irrelevant to the reason the applicant was discharged from the Naval Reserves.

The applicant states in issues 4 and 5 that he was not given a chance to do 24 months of active duty, but instead received an other than honorable discharge without a hearing. The Commanding Officer has the authority to make a recommendation for separation to CNMPC based on the applicant’s missed drills. The characterization takes into account the service record and the significant number of drills missed. The Board assumed some regularity concerning the discharge because the notification and election of rights were not included in the service record. The Board found the applicant was properly discharged and will not grant relief on the basis of these issues.

There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided ample documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.
 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), effective 15 Jun 1987 until 13 Dec 1989, Article 3630800, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE.

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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington, DC 20374-5023       


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500169

    Original file (ND0500169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Applicant notified that if separation is approved the least favorable characterization of service authorized is under other than honorable conditions.920717: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail P901 567 389, return receipt requested. There is no...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00701

    Original file (ND00-00701.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00574

    Original file (ND02-00574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area and that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Enlistment documents Copy of DD Form 214, dated July 11, 1984 NAVPERS 1070/613,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00557

    Original file (ND04-00557.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-QM3, USNR-R Docket No. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00643

    Original file (ND99-00643.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 Letter from applicant dtd 8 Apr 99 Letter from Floyd Private Industry Council, dtd 5 Apr 99 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880630 Date of Discharge: 921022 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00490

    Original file (ND00-00490.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00490 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000307, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge based on his missed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00292

    Original file (ND01-00292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00292 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010116, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 930515: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had been an unsatisfactory participant in the Ready Reserve, warrants separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00415

    Original file (ND99-00415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Placed on medical hold.900802: Commanding officer, via certified letter, requested applicant provide additional medical information concerning questionable seizure activity. There was no documentation in his service record nor did the applicant provide any evidence indicating that the applicant was not responsible for his actions in failing to reply or that he was not provided all appropriate due process.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00953

    Original file (ND04-00953.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00953 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040525. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :890128: Enlistment contract into the USNR documents acknowledgement of the requirement to participate as prescribed by the regulations of the Naval Reserve the six year term in the Naval Reserve Selected...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00929

    Original file (ND00-00929.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00929 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000725, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from applicant dated January 5, 2001 Copy of appointment of Veterans Service Organization dated July 8, 1999 Statement in support of application from...