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

 ex-BUCN, USNR-R
Docket No. ND05-00169

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20041105.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050511.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was 4 to 1 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, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I was a good sailor.  I served during war time.  I suffered from depression my last few months in the Reserves causing me to miss drills.  At time when I was to make up 12 drill days I was in Alvin C. York Medical Center suffering from depression.  I was just a couple months from fullfilling my obligation when released I have tried since 1992 to try and be the best person I can.  I have learned to deal with depression since I haven’t had a reassurance of depression in years.  I am just wanting to try and fix mistakes I made years ago.  This discharge has come to hurt my as far as getting a better job.  I believe with the years I gave and no more time than what was left on my active reserve obligation that I will hopefully be able to have my discharge upgraded.  Thanks.”

Remarks:

“I want to thank you for considering my appeal.  I hope that my discharge will be upgraded so I can continue to better myself and my family.  Once again I wanted to thank you.  I hope that you can make these changes for me.”

Documentation

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

Tennessee Technology Center at Dickson transcripts (5 pages)
Austin Peay State University transcripts

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:  861126			Date of Discharge:  921013

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  22
	Inactive:  04  10  26

Age at Entry:  17 (Parental Consent)	Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  BU3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.70 (4)			Behavior:  3.70 (4)		OTA:  3.70

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NUC, NER (2), NDSM, SASM, SSDR, KLM, NRMSM, M16 Expert

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:

920610:	Applicant directed to report for active duty training for 12 days not later than 0730, 920713.  Mailed 920616 by certified mail # P6851492RT04012.  No indication Applicant received the orders.

920717:	Commanding Officer notified the Applicant of intended recommendation for separation by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve as evidenced by failure to report for 12 days annual active duty for training on 920713.  Applicant was notified via certified mail P901 567 389, return receipt requested.  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.  Applicant receipted for letter by return signature but failed to acknowledge the contents.

920717:	Applicant’s failure to acknowledge notification via official certified mail construed as a waiver of all rights per MILPERSMAN 3640200.

920916:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve as evidenced by failure to report for 12 days of annual active duty for training on 920713.

920929:	Deputy, Chief of Naval Personnel BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve as evidenced by failure to report for 12 days of annual active duty for training on 920713.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19921013 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.  Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  The Applicant contends that he was a good sailor and he is entitled to an upgrade.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  There is credible evidence in the record to suggest the Applicant’s missed 12 days of his additional annual training in the Naval Reserve.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy.  Such conduct falls far short of that expected of a member of the U.S. military and does not meet the requirements for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

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 should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of enhancing employment opportunities and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

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.  The Applicant can provide any additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		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