Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01078
Original file (ND99-01078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EOCA, USNR
Docket No. ND99-01078

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990805, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000512. 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 unanimous 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)

 I feel my discharge was inequitable because my situation at the time was not taken into consideration. The attached brief and other supporting documents should give the Board a clear understanding of the events leading up to my discharge from the Reserves. I ask that the Board grant my request for an Honorable discharge status based on the following issues.

1. Unsatisfactory unit organization. I would like to start with my frustration and disappointment with the naval Reserves early in my enlistment. After my return from EO"A" school, I spent my weekends for the next six months in a king of Limbo called an Indoctrination Unit. The normal indoctrination time was usually two months. Apparently I was lost in the shuffle and did not realize this early enough to think it abnormal. I spent my weekends as a paper runner and an errand boy. Being fresh out of boot camp and "A" school, I was at the bottom of the food chain and did as instructed without complaint, at the same time feeling that I was not utilizing my training as an equipment operator. Little did I know that this was how nearly my entire enlistment was to be spent.

I signed up with the expectations and desires to be a heavy equipment operator for the Seabees. As I prepared for this in boot camp and then in EO "A" school, giving of my time, not and myself to mention the government's expense to train me, I had no idea of the travesty to come. The first two years were spent trying to comprehend what I had gotten myself into. Once I was transferred to an actual Seabee unit a(CB16), matters only became worse. Instead of operating equipment and utilizing my training, weekends were spent reading the paper and drinking coffee. Other times we swept or filed. Once muster was over, individuals dispersed and did pretty much whatever suited him or her. I even recall several individuals leaving the premises between musters to go home. Prior to Operation Desert Storm I can honestly recall performing within my rate only twice. I drove a dump truck to and from a job site. Apparently the reserve center I was stationed at did not have any equipment other than some trucks and vans for the motor pool. The only projects were at Camp Pendleton, which was over an hour drive away. On the rare occasion I did go to drill at Pendleton, I was given the tasks of a builder, such as mixing concrete or installing carpet. I was not trained to be a builder.

2. Personal Problems. On a personal note, while dealing with this frustration, I was also suffering hardships at home. My Mother was left to care for my two sisters and me while my adoptive father was away for over a year in a penal institution. The stress on all of us was nearly unbearable not just emotionally and physically, but mentally and financially as well. To this day, the family still feels the effects of that time. My mother has been the steady provider, while her husband has difficulty holding a consistent job until recently. My immaturity at the time, the hardship, and my mounting frustration with my drill weekends severely clouded my judgement and kept me from performing my obligations to the USNR.

3. Firefighter Qualification. In closing I would like to express my gratitude for your patience and time in addressing this matter. I again implore the Board to show leniency and compassion in granting me an Honorable discharge from the Naval Reserves. I am an honest citizen, a loyal husband, and responsible father trying to support my family as best I can. As stated in my application, one of the minimum qualifications to be a firefighter is and Honorable discharge from service, which I was given from Active duty but not from the Reserves. Please don't permit the misguided actions of a confused and frustrated young boy back then serve as an impassable obstacle for a wiser and mature man who only wants to better himself and provide a better life for his wife and child now. Instead consider the enclosed copies as well as my Honorable service during the Gulf War as the basis for your decision. My firefighter exam is July 6, 1999. Your positive reply is both needed and anticipated as soon as convenient for the Board.

4. Active Duty Participation. I would like to add that my time in the navy was not all ill spent. In fact, I am very proud to have served in an Active capacity during Operation Desert Storm from January 3, 1991 5o July 4, 1991 in support of our country. Had my time in the Reserves been like Active duty, I have no doubts that my appeal to you would not be necessary. I utilized my training to the fullest and gained even more experience. I also received various awards and commendations during the Gulf conflict, including an Honorable discharge at the completion of my tour of duty. To this day, I am proud to be a Veteran of the United States Armed Forces.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Applicant's Brief of the Issues
Certificate of Appreciation (COMRESNAVCONFOR) dtd 15 Feb 92
Operation Desert Storm Certificate of Appreciation
Letter of Recommendation from Pep Boys dtd Mar 16, 1996
Letter of Employment from Pep Boys

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: 870819               Date of Discharge: 930525

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 10 22
         Inactive: 04 10 15

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 84

 Highest Rate: EOCA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.45 (4)    Behavior: 3.55 (4)                OTA: 3.45

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: LOA (2)

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880307:  Reported to active duty for initial training.

 880715:  Released from active duty for training having served 4 months, 9 days of active duty for training with a characterization of service as "honorable".
910102:  Involuntarily recalled to active duty for a period of 90 days less released or extended for a lesser period by competent authority in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

910206:  Applicant involuntarily extended on active duty per Presidential Authority Title 10 USC 673. Authority: NAVADMIN 009/91.
910714:  Released from active duty by reason of "expiration of term of active obligated service", having served 6 months 13 days with a characterization of service as "honorable".
930216:  Applicant failed to report for 12 days of additional annual training as ordered.

930312:  Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. Applicant receipted for letter by return signature.

930406:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation, and submit statements in his behalf. Applicant objected to the separation.

930423:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the ready Reserve due to failure to maintain satisfactory drill participation and failure to report for 12 days additional active duty. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "Member failed to: (a) maintain satisfactory drilling participation (b) contact this Readiness Center and (c) report for 12 days additional active duty. EOCN (Applicant) is not complying with the provisions of his contract in the Sea and Air Mariner program. This member shows below minimum potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization, therefore, an Other Than Honorable discharge is recommended.

930525:  ACNP for Naval Reserve Personnel Management directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve as evidenced by failure to maintain satisfactory drill participation.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930525 under other than honorable conditions 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, the Board found that although the applicant may feel that his unit was disorganized, the applicant did not show up for drill which was his requirement to do, and therefore was separated. The Board found it both proper and equitable and will not grant relief based on this issue.

In the applicant’s issue 2, the Board found nothing in the records nor did the applicant submit any supporting documentation that showed that his personal problems were of sufficient magnitude that they could not be resolved through standard military channels or by the applicant’s chain of command. In fact, the Board found that the applicant’s age, education, test scores, prior service, promotions and awards were sufficient to qualify him for enlistment. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.

In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board found that 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.

In the applicant’s issue 4, the Board found that although it was commendable that the applicant participated in Desert Storm, the applicant unfortunately did not fulfill his entire commitment in the Reserves and therefore was separated. No relief will be granted based on this issue.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, 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, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00908

    Original file (ND99-00908.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00908 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990629, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable or General/under Honorable conditions. 900121: Commanding Officer, Naval Reserve Center Montgomery, AL issued active duty orders for 19 months by certified mail to applicant. 900310: Letter of intent to administratively separate under Other Than Honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training...

  • 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 | 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00188

    Original file (ND03-00188.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00188 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20020904. The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00840

    Original file (ND03-00840.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    And when I have requested that I would be terminated from the reserves it was not because I did not want to be a part of the navy I just didn’t see the point of me sitting around in the reserves. 860615: Acknowledged the policy change for excused drills.880907: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. ]890425: Letter of intent to...

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01097

    Original file (ND03-01097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Accident Police Report April 13, 2002 (2 pages) Patient Ledger (3 pages) Applicant’s service record (2 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00447

    Original file (ND02-00447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SKSN, USNR Docket No. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from the American Legion 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: 860814 Date of...

  • 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00669

    Original file (ND99-00669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Issues (verbatim) Discharged with an other than honorable discharge my conduct at the time was the reason I received the type of discharge that I did. 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...