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

 ex-STGSR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00279

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991227, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000810.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an inequity, but no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change to:  GENERAL(UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 12a, Date Entered AD This Period should read: “97  DEC 22” vice 98  JAN 18, Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period should read: “00  09  11” vice “00  08  15”,  Block 24, Block 25, Separation Authority should read: “NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144” vice “MPM 1910-142/CO LTR DTD 98SEP24”, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read:  “MISCONDUCT” vice “MISCONDUCT-COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim) 

1.  My Other Then Honorable- RE4 discharge is inequitable because of a number of factors.  I wasn't given the necessary guidance for my situation.  I graduated from high school at 17 and enlisted four months later when I turned eighteen.  I was very young and immature.  I had studied about and read about the Navy SEALS and I knew I could do the job.  Never worrying about my future I felt the Navy would help me to put my life in a better perspective.  I wanted to be a Navy SEAL.  I was living in Missouri and proceeded to train my body for the rigorous physical demands that I knew were ahead of me.  However I was ill prepared for the mental challenges I encountered.  Attending BUD/S class 220, my classmates and I engaged in many drinking episodes.  As a civilian living in rural Missouri I never engaged in alcohol binges like I encountered in the Navy.  Upon my transfer to Coronado, CA, the mental challenges increased, as did my alcohol abuse.  On 980702 1 received a Driving Under the influence (DUI) conviction.  I was now in a state of fear.  I had lost focus on my future as a Navy SEAL.  I lost all confidence in myself and felt I had nothing to offer the Navy.  As a result of this conviction, I lost an opportunity of physical security overseas duty and thus returning to BUD/S.  Worried, I spoke on more than one
occasion with BMC (SWCC) B_, in charge of X-Division.  I confided in him and asked for help about where I could go and what could I do.  If he was there to help me, it sure didn't appear so.  I was given the impression that I was not worth his or anyone's effort to help me.  I also tried to speak with BMCM B_ for guidance.  I decided I would be better off finding my own solutions.  I made infinite telephone calls to different job coordinators in an effort to get myself back to Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) so I could get some rank and some skills before being sent to the fleet.  Nothing seemed to help me out.  All I was being told was that I was going to sit in a hold until my civilian DUI conviction was taken care of I applied for leave to go and see my family that I hadn't seen since boot camp.  I was denied leave even though I had some 22 days built up.  Out of admitted ignorance and depression I went UA for 26 days returning on my own will on 980825.  I knew I was wrong but I also realized that my decision to join the Navy was wrong for me.  I attended Mass on or about 980826 where I told Captain M_ everything I have told you in my letter but without the stress of a young boy speaking to a respected Seal officer under the disrespected eyes of his command.  I have been trying to get my life back in order.  Recently I finished my treatment program on 990629.  Slowly I am repaying my debts and with effort my progress in school has been good.

2.  The military in many ways provided me with numerous opportunities to learn about myself.  However, I was too immature for the responsibility that came with the decision.  Today I have returned to City College and am pursuing a career in sports medicine.  Although my career in the Navy was short; I learned a great deal.  I am a recovering alcoholic and I have recently regained my driver's license.  I have a GPA of 3.6, which is higher than ever before, and I'm back on a college soccer team.  I haven't been able to return to Missouri due to the fact that I had to finish my DUI classes in the state of California to regain my driver's license.  My new goals are to earn Bachelors in Science degree in Kinesiology while playing soccer.  I request an Honorable discharge so I will be able to state that my brief Navy experience was at least a positive one.  I realize that my length of service was short.  I am not asking for any benefits but I am asking that you reconsider the Other Than Honorable to Honorable.  Don't allow my immature actions to affect the future that is possible for me.  As I mature and grow I would like to think that one-day the Navy might re-consider me as a person worthy of a career in the military.  I feel confident that I will have much more to offer as I continue my education.  Turning twenty this October I have grown much these past two years and have much to be thankful for.  I appreciate that I have this opportunity and it is my hope that you will agree that an Honorable Discharge be granted.

Documentation

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

Riverside Community College transcript
Riverside Community College Soccer team photo
Certificate form Athletic Participation dated 1999-2000
Certificate of A School completion
DUI conviction statement
Certificate of DUI completion dated June 29, 1999
Military notes newspaper article
SEAL trainee dies newspaper article
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	971025 - 971221	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  971222		Date of Discharge:  981002

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  09  11
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  73

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF			Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  25 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980826:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave 0730, 30Jul98 to 0730, 25Aug98 (25 days/surrendered).
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SR.   No indication of appeal in the record.

980827:	Civil Conviction: Southbay Judicial District, CA for violation of driving under the influence of alcohol on 2Jul98.
Sentence:  Counsel fee of $25.00.  No further information found in service record.  Applicant attended first offender program 3/31/99 to 4/29/99. 

980909:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction as evidenced by your civilian conviction of August 27, 1998 for driving under the influence.

980909:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

980917:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense / civil conviction.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  STGSR (applicant) was taken to nonjudicial punishment on 26 August 1998 and was awarded restriction and extra duties for 30 days and reduction to E-1, for an unauthorized absence of 25 days.  He requested to be administratively separated and was advised that there was no basis for his administrative separation.  He then expressed his intent to plead guilty to pending civilian charges of driving under the influence of alcohol on his scheduled court date of 27 August 1998, and requested that he be administratively separated on the basis of his civilian conviction.  He was advised that his separation would likely be characterized as Other Than Honorable, to which he agreed.  I recommend that STGSR (applicant's) separation be approved on the basis of the commission of a serious offense evidenced by his civilian conviction of 27 August 1998.  I further recommend that the characterization of service be Other Than Honorable.

980924:	Commander, Naval Special Warfare Command directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 981002 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to civil conviction (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, but inequitable (C and D).

In the applicant’s issue 1, although the applicant may feel his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his actions, the Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  The Board did take into account the applicant’s situation and reasons for his misconduct, but the applicant is still responsible for his actions and therefore the Board will not grant relief based on this issue.

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.  The Board took into account the applicant’s post-service accomplishments in issue 2 and will grant partial relief to a general (under honorable conditions).  The applicant is eligible for a personal appearance hearing if he desires full relief 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 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to 31 Aug 98, Article 1910-144 (previously 3630610), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

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