Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00877
Original file (MD99-00877.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00877

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990614, 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 000410. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Physical disability, existing prior to entry (determined by a medical board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8404.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
1. My undesirable discharge was inequitable because, it was based on my medical condition, that I had no control over, but was constantly interfering with my job duties and physical fitness training. My medical condition (pes cavus with bunions) became increasingly worst because I was told to continue training. I continued to perform my daily duties until I couldn't take the pain any more, so I was forced on various medication, which changed my performance dramatically.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
CO, Hdqtrs & Serv Co, lst Medical Battalion, Camp Pendleton letter of 20 Nov 89
Character Reference letter from Pastor J_ L_ dated April 25, 1999
Character Reference letter from employer, Preferred Trading International dated April 20, 1999
PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                870227 - 870907  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 870908               Date of Discharge: 900511

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 08 04 (Doesn't exclude time lost)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 46

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.9 (9)              Conduct: 3.8 (9)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Expert Badge

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 46

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Physical disability, existing prior to entry (determined by a medical board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8404.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

881005:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct (lackadaisical attitude and carefree mannerism when directed to own up to your military and financial obligation).

881108:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility for promotion to LCPL but was not recommended for the month of November because of frequent tardiness.

890109:  Unauthorized absence since 0731 this date.

890131:  Returned from unauthorized absence at 1500, this date.

890418:  Summary Court Martial
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 - UA from unit to wit: MSSG-13, from 9 Jan 89 to 30 Jan 89.
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87 - Missed movement of MSSG-13 on 12 Jan 89.
         Findings: to Charge I and II - guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for one month, forfeiture of $349.00 for one month, and reduction in pay grade to E-1.
         CA 890418: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

891107:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility for promotion to PFC but was not recommended for the month of November because of a failure to comply with proper Medical advice to correct a foot disorder that does not enable you to perform your duties.

891204:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility for promotion to PFC but was not recommended for the month of December because of unsatisfactory performance.

900115:  Medical Board recommended applicant be discharged due to physical disability, existing prior to entry. (Primary diagnosis - foot type, bilaterally, #754.71 - Second diagnosis - Symptomatic bunions, bilateral, #7271)

900301:  Applicant accepted findings of the Medical Board, waived his rights to a hearing before a Physical Evaluation Board and request administrative discharge from the service as soon as possible.

900417:  CG, 1 st Force Service Support Group reviewed and approved the Medical Board recommendation to discharge application by reason of physical disability due to foot type, bilaterally and directed the applicant's discharge with a general under honorable conditions with a separation code of JFM1, reenlistment code of RE-3P, authority MARCORSEPMAN Par 8404.
PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900511 with a general under honorable conditions due to physical disability, existing prior to entry (determined by a medical board) (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).

The applicant alleges that his performance was changed dramatically because of the medication he was taking for pes cavus. The Board determined that the applicant was being treated for cavus foot, not pes cavus as he alleges. A review of the applicant’s medical record indicates that he was prescribed motrin, an anti-inflammatory and analgesic, not a performance-altering drug, for the pain in his feet. Relief denied.

The Board determined that the applicant was UA for 22 days and received a Special Court-Martial for that offense. Furthermore, the applicant’s average proficiency and conduct marks, while a Marine, were 3.9/3.8 respectively. Clearly the applicant’s service was not honorable. Relief denied.

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing providing his request is received within 15 years from the date of his discharge.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, ( MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817), paragraph 8404 DISCHARGE FOR DISABILITY EXISTING PRIOR TO SERVICE.
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

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00294

    Original file (MD00-00294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 900822 - 910324 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910325 Date of Discharge: 911219 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 00 08 25 {Does not exclude lost time) Inactive: None...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02293

    Original file (PD-2013-02293.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Foot Condition . It documented hallux valgus and pes cavus (claw foot, congenital) deformitiesof both feet and full ROM of the right ankle and hindfoot.That note itself did not reference trauma, but a follow-up orthopedic entry provided a history of injury to the right foot only. The podiatry addendum 8 months prior to separation documented pain rated “6/10 progressing to 9/10 on his right foot;” with no rest pain of the left foot, but 5/10 pain with activity.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00680

    Original file (MD04-00680.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. My medical records will show that prior to enlistment my physical condition was prime and prior to discharge it was less than acceptable for Marine Corps standards, which is why I was discharged (because of service connected disabilities) I now receive 20% compensation.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00191

    Original file (MD00-00191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommend member be administratively separated for reason of "Physical Condition Not Disability".990125: Counseled for deficiencies having been diagnosed by competent medical authority as having pre-existing bilateral tailor's bunions, this condition prevents you from completing the training required to continue on active duty. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990205 with an uncharacterized service by reason of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00935

    Original file (PD2013 00935.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB combined the MEB referred conditions of FM and bilateral plantar fasciitis and pes cavus and rated them as one unfitting condition of FM coded at 5025, specified by the VASRD as “with widespread musculoskeletal pain and tender points, with or without associated fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, paresthesia, headaches, irritable bowel symptoms, depression, anxiety, or Raynaud’s-like symptoms.” The PEB cited avoidance of pyramiding IAW VASRD §4.14 for not rating the plantar...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01177

    Original file (MD04-01177.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Recommend discharge physical disability.890320: Applicant informed of findings of medical board recommending discharge by reason of physically disability existing prior to entry on active duty and not aggravated by service. A waiver of the physical standards is not recommended.890612: Commanding General, 4 th Marine Division (Rein) notified Applicant of discharge by reason of being found not physically qualified for retention in the Marine...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00592

    Original file (PD2009-00592.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for the Sinus Tarsi Syndrome condition, and separated at 10% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Naval and Department of Defense regulations. The CI was separated on 20020814 for Sinus Tarsi Syndrome with chronic bilateral foot and ankle pain rated analogously as code 5279, Metatarsalgia, anterior, (Morton’s Disease), unilateral or bilateral, which assigns...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00019

    Original file (MD03-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00019 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020926 requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Entry Level Separation or Uncharacterized. 941122: Commanding Officer recommended honorable discharge by reason of erroneous enlistment. 941218: GCMCA [CG, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] directed the Applicant's honorable discharge by reason of erroneous entry into the U.S. Marine Corps on the basis of not meeting the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-00868

    Original file (PD-2013-00868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20061020 The bilateral foot conditions, characterized by the MEB as “hallux valgus” and “bilateral pes planus,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. There were no other MH treatment notes for review.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01075

    Original file (PD2011-01075.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY SEPARATION DATE: 20050228 NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE NUMBER: PD1101075 BOARD DATE: 20121002 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (42A/Personnel Administration), medically separated for chronic right foot pain secondary to plantar fasciitis. An initial Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the chronic...