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

ex-SHSN, USNR-R
Docket No. ND02-00843

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020529, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to TRANSFERRED TO IRR.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030221.  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 and narrative reason 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, as submitted

1.  The following is a letter of circumstances in order to upgrade an Other Than Honorable Discharge to an Honorable Discharge. I entered the Naval Reserve in August 08,1988. 1 was appointed Athletic Petty Officer in Company Kl16 at NTC Orlando Fl.  I reported to NT-TC Meridian, MS, for Ship Serviceman Apprenticeship school October 08, 1988.  I completed the school with honors with a final mark of 91.92.  My standing in the course was 8 of 27.  I then reported to Naval Readiness Center Seattle and was dispatched to a Fleet Hospital Unit located at NAS Sandpoint Seattle.  I participated in this unit for approximately two drilling periods before I was asked to fill an active duty slot at the Naval Readiness Center Seattle.  I proceeded to work for Petty Officer Second Class Hill for the next seven months.  While working for the Personnel Support department my duties included researching and reconciling payroll discrepancies.  I lectured servicemen on benefit programs, and duties with the Naval Financial Office.  I audited over 1500 personnel records for GI bill discrepancies.  I also participated in bringing the Naval Reserve Database R-Stars online at its introductory state.  I contributed moral support to a co-workers wife and dependent when the distressed Petty Officer attempted suicide.  The Petty Officer in question was missing for over 24 hours and it was his wife and myself that had discovered his whereabouts in a local motel in a state of unconscious.  I was discharged honorable from the active duty billet and slotted to a Seabees unit located at NAS Sandpoint.  I had informed the unit that I would like to be slotted into the IRR as I would be leaving the states with my husband at his newly appointed duty station aboard the USS Midway located in Yokoska, Japan.  I needed several months to take get my papers in order obtain a passport and dependent orders to Japan.  In addition to my papers I was responsible for preparing two households for shipment to Yokoska.  Both households had to be extensively cleaned prior to leaving for Japan.  I received my DD214 with an Honorable discharge.  I did not hear from my unit in any form the time I requested my transfer to the IRR until the time of my deployment as a dependent overseas.  I assumed that I was transferred without any problems.  While processing into the Washington State Army National Guard, in September 2001 I requested my personnel records from Naval Personnel Records.  While further reviewing my records an Administrative Remarks Form NAVPERS 1070, 613 REV. 3-731 was found stating a discharge in November 05, 1990 under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of Unsatisfactory Participation in the Naval Reserve.  The status of this Other than Honorable Discharge from the Navy reserve is preventing holding back a ship date of June 01 2002.  This situation is preventing me from becoming a future Officer.  I believe that the discharge was do to my Units lack of communication as well as my lack of attention to detail.  I served the Naval Reserve honorably and professionally in active duty status as well as reserve status.  I am requesting that my discharge be upgraded to an Honorable status as soon as possible so that I can continue on with my training to become an Officer in the Washington Army National Guard.  If you have any questions regarding this matter please feel free to call me at anytime. (Telephone number deleted).

Sincerely,

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant's passport (2 copies)
International certificates of vaccination (2 copies)
Letter of recommendation, undated (2 copies)
Memorandum for record dated May 7, 2002 (2 copies)
Copies of Applicant's DD Form 214
Two pages from Applicant's service record (2 copies)
Civilian education status dated April 24, 2002 (2 copies)
Transcript/Grade Record (2 copies)
Letter from State of Washington, Military Department dated September 25, 2002 (2 copies)
Memorandum for record dated May 15, 2002
Letter from State of Washington, Military Department dated August 27, 2002
Memorandum dated August 19, 2002
Letter from State of Washington, Military Department dated June 4, 2002
Memorandum from Department of the Army dated May 9, 2002
Application for federal recognition as an Army National Guard Officer or Warrant Officer and Appointment as a Reserve Commissioned Officer or Warrant Officer of the Army in the Army National Guard of the United States dated May 7, 2002 (4 pages)
Applicant's résumé

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880204		Date of Discharge:  901105

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  09  16
	Inactive:  01  11  15

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  49

Highest Rate:  SHSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.80 (1)	Behavior:  3.60 (2)		OTA:  3.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

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:

880808:	Applicant to Recruit Training.

881007:	Applicant transferred and received for active duty training, NTTC, Meridian, MS.

881116:	Applicant released from active duty training.

881117:	Applicant received for drill pay NRPC Seattle, WA

890724:	Applicant received for active duty, NAVRESCEN, Seattle, WA.

900129:	Applicant released from active duty training.

900130:	Applicant received for drill pay.

901105:	Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Naval Reserve.

Discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 901105 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).

Issue 1.  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing career opportunities as requested in the issue.  The Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s characterization of service and narrative reason for separation was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.
 
The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the offense for which she was discharged.  Relief denied.

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), effective 14 Dec 1989 until 14 Aug 1991, 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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “afls14.jag.af.mil”.  

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