RV'ing at the Naval Station in Key West

Remember there is a difference between a DoD civilian federal employee and DoD contractor. Either way, I believe it is a good idea to allow each Base Commander to set the policy as long as the policy is well designed and enforced. As mentioned already, there is a lot of differences in demand depending upon the location and facilities. When there is variation, there should be discretion.

There are scenarios where allowing an Active Duty member to "homestead" is reasonable. For instance, Active Duty member will be PCSing or going overseas alone in six months, puts their house on the market, it sells quickly, family goes on ahead to new base while the Active Duty member stays behind in the FamCamp until his own move.

Let the Commanders' have the flexibility to make decisions not just enforce rules.

OH48Lt wrote:
Can DoD civilians walk off the job tomorrow if they so choose? Some are under contract, but can still walk if they want to take the $$$ hit.

I don't think active duty personnel can do that. They'll wind up in the brig and a bad discharge that strips them of VA benefits if they do.

I'm a disabled combat veteran, and can't use the facility.

You could if you were 100% disabled or had stayed for retirement. You're not eligible and that's the end of it, if you want to change the rules talk to your congressional representative.

Most DoD civilians are veterans, because there is a 5% preference for veterans, or a 10% for disabled veterans.

Can DoD civilians walk off the job tomorrow if they so choose? Some are under contract, but can still walk if they want to take the $$$ hit.

I don't think active duty personnel can do that. They'll wind up in the brig and a bad discharge that strips them of VA benefits if they do.

I'm a disabled combat veteran, and can't use the facility.

You guys don't have an effing clue about DoD civilians.

I am a USN veteran and retired DoD civilian. I served alongside active duty military and was deployed to active duty ships. I was a computer engineer providing field support to the Combat Systems computer and display suite. As a civilian, I have been deployed to hot spots around the globe, because if a computer is going to break, it will do it in the most inconvenient place possible. ;) I got there by any means possible, fixed the ship and trained the shipboard technicians, then returned home and did my normal job until the next crisis.

As for civilians crowding out the park, I don't see that. What I see as we travel around is active duty military gaming the system. They buy a cheap trailer, then live in it at the FamCamp while drawing housing allowance. Not right, no matter who does it. The campgrounds are for recreational use by all authorized personnel, not to be used for housing.

I'm married to a very handsome fellow who happens to be retired USN and also retired DoD. I have over 30 years of total service, he has over 40. If you do the math, you will see we have served this country for over 70 years total. I know some of you one term enlistees are going to have heartburn with this post but it's time someone told you the straight truth.

QUOTE: "The most popular/high-volume parks don't allow DOD Civ, heck I know of one that only allowed active duty (small, in a high usage area)"

That's not entirely true. Many of the 'popular' parks are full because they allow DOD in ... and so it "looks full" and "popular" but the retired and AD military can't get in on short term vacations, leave, or travel.

And the problem we've seen too, the 'DOD' stick around all year, saving money, and the campsites become a mess ... any time we have a situation where any one 'type' of user stays continuously, it brings a sense of "don't care" attitude with it. They're already cheating the system (taking housing money and then camping, and keeping it." So that kind of mentality suggests a lack of ethics, and even less character.

As noted, each facility has the flexibility to set "who can use", it all comes down to money. These facilities don't have the option of receiving massive amounts of DOD money to sit around unused/underused

Many of the parks that allow DOD Civ and retired DOD Civ do so for one reason, there are not enough active duty (first priority) or retired (2nd priority) in the area to ever fill the campground. The more income the park generates the easier it is to fund the facility.
The most popular/high-volume parks don't allow DOD Civ, heck I know of one that only allowed active duty (small, in a high usage area)

monkey44 wrote:

gbopp wrote:

TNRIVERSIDE wrote:
Looks like its not all Veterans.

Authorized Users
Active, National Guard, Reservists, Retired, 100% DAV, DoD Civilians, DoT civilians working for Coast Guard, NATO allies on orders to the US.

Isn't America great? I commented on this about a year ago.

A combat wounded veteran will be turned away from a military campground.
But, a pencil pushing civilian who never served will be welcomed with open arms.

In the link posted by accsys it states normal military veterans are NOT authorized to use the campground.
A civilian MAY be authorized.

It's not right, JMO

We need to rethink our hero status..... JMO

Where do you get "pencil pushing civilian" ... civilians are not allowed to camp in military campgrounds. Active duty, retired military, and Disabled Veterans in that order.

Although, the base commander can allow DOD assigned to his base to camp. I personally disagree with DOD camping, but am not a CO ... it is technically against the law for DOD to camp, but many bases turn a blind eye to it because it generates revenue. And, we all know the dollar is top dog ...

One problem with allowing DOD civilians - it fills up the sites long-term, and then an authorized military family gets turned away. We have that battle a lot.

DOD get a housing allowance, quite a bit, to rent locally when working in DOD projects - then some of those folks rent a CG space for about a fourth of that allowance, and put that extra money in their own pockets. In fact, some AD families get BHA, and do the same thing ... I believe it's illegal, abuse of funds to do it - but that's a losing battle as well. The folks that benefit from that abuse are the ones that make those enforcement choices - so, guess what?

In the link posted by accsys it states, regular veterans are NOT authorized to use the campgrounds.
Civilians MAY be authorized.

It's not right, JMO

Right or wrong, again their park their rules.
Several years ago we were at a Famcamp on west coast and this couple with Canadian plates camped next to us. We thought maybe they were sponsored by their active duty son in law. Got talking and he was retired Canadian Army. He told us some Famcamps allow them depending on Base Commander policy. Also mentioned that that we could use their Famcamp system if we were up there.

gbopp wrote:

TNRIVERSIDE wrote:
Looks like its not all Veterans.

Authorized Users
Active, National Guard, Reservists, Retired, 100% DAV, DoD Civilians, DoT civilians working for Coast Guard, NATO allies on orders to the US.

Isn't America great? I commented on this about a year ago.

A combat wounded veteran will be turned away from a military campground.
But, a pencil pushing civilian who never served will be welcomed with open arms.

We need to rethink our hero status..... JMO

Totally agree.

gbopp wrote:

TNRIVERSIDE wrote:
Looks like its not all Veterans.

Authorized Users
Active, National Guard, Reservists, Retired, 100% DAV, DoD Civilians, DoT civilians working for Coast Guard, NATO allies on orders to the US.

Isn't America great? I commented on this about a year ago.

A combat wounded veteran will be turned away from a military campground.
But, a pencil pushing civilian who never served will be welcomed with open arms.

We need to rethink our hero status..... JMO

Where do you get "pencil pushing civilian" ... civilians are not allowed to camp in military campgrounds. Active duty, retired military, and Disabled Veterans in that order.

Although, the base commander can allow DOD assigned to his base to camp. I personally disagree with DOD camping, but am not a CO ... it is technically against the law for DOD to camp, but many bases turn a blind eye to it because it generates revenue. And, we all know the dollar is top dog ...

One problem with allowing DOD civilians - it fills up the sites long-term, and then an authorized military family gets turned away. We have that battle a lot.

DOD get a housing allowance, quite a bit, to rent locally when working in DOD projects - then some of those folks rent a CG space for about a fourth of that allowance, and put that extra money in their own pockets. In fact, some AD families get BHA, and do the same thing ... I believe it's illegal, abuse of funds to do it - but that's a losing battle as well. The folks that benefit from that abuse are the ones that make those enforcement choices - so, guess what?