Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00065
Original file (MD02-00065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00065

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011004, 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 020529. 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: UNCHARACTERIZED/ ERRONEOUS ENTRY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
CO, RAC ltr of Recommendation for Discharge dtd 07SEP95
 Notification and Acknowledgement of Separation Proceedings and Acknowledgement of Rights dtd 05SEP95
Naval Hospital Beaufort's ltr of 05SEP95
Branch Med Clinic, NCRD Parris Island consultation (3 pages)
Recruit's Evaluation Card (3 pages)
Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 1966) (3 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                950714 - 950813  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950814               Date of Discharge: 950912

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 00 29
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 51

 Highest Rank: Pvt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: NMF*                          Conduct: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Found in service record.

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

UNCHARACTERIZED/ERRONEOUS ENTRY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.2.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950828:  Branch Medical Clinic, MCRD Parris Island, SC: 21 year old white male recruit first came to attention of Branch Medical Clinic on 28 Aug 95, when he was referred by the Hd, Dept of Oral Surgery, for discharge from the military service. Pt was evaluated by the Oral surgical Specialist because he complained of severe pain at his old surgical scar site post cleft palate repair at age 2. He also complained of the sensation of "drowning" at the pool due to water going from his mouth into his nose. Examination revealed residual oral -nasal communication allowing fluid to pass into airway. Sinus series x-rays were reviewed by the radiologist and reported as "normal paranasal sinus studies". Review of SF-88 and SF-93 from Atlanta, GA MEPS revealed notation of his cleft palate repair noted as "cleft palate - palate intact, speech is clear, NCD". The member was found physically qualified for enlistment on 14 Aug 95.
         DIAGNOSIS: Status Post Cleft Palate Repair with Open Oral - Nasal Communication, Symptomatic, EPTE.
         RECOMMENDATION:
         Referred for administrative/entry level separation. Does not meet minimum standards for enlistment. Incurred no injuries and has had no defect aggravated by active military service. Present condition is "Not Physically Qualified" in accordance with the physical standards for enlistment as opposed to "Physical Unfitness by Reason of Physical Disability.” Condition is unlikely to change in the future.
950905:  Medical evaluation by Naval Hospital Beaufort: Recruit does not meet the minimum standards for enlistment, medical board proceedings would not be appropriate. Specific condition is S/P Cleft palate Repair.
950905:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a erroneous entry as evidenced by S/P Cleft Palate Repair.
950905:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

950907:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous entry. The factual basis for this recommendation was due to pre-existing medical condition - S/P Cleft Palate Repair.

950907:  GCMCA [CG, MCRD, Eastern Recruiting Region] directed the applicant's discharge with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous entry into the U.S. Marine Corps.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 950912 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous entry (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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “Entry Level Separation” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct that would merit an “honorable” characterization. The applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than a month in the military to warrant a change of discharge to “honorable.”

 Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice 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. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A . The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until present, paragraph 6204, DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENT AND INDUCTION.
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 “ afls10.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      

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501272

    Original file (MD0501272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. He stated in his report “I have seen several recruits who remained with hearing levels worse than this.” The report further states that my hearing is essentially normal. nd RTBN, MCRD Parris Island, SC, recommended Applicant’s discharge by reason of erroneous entry.040802: SF513/DD2161 [Consultation Sheet]: “Reason for request: ENT eval requested on 18 y/o male who is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600371

    Original file (MD0600371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Recommended that the Applicant be placed on a light duty status pending separation.920812: Naval Hospital Beaufort, SC, Medical Board:According to the recruit’s own statement, accepted by the Board, he had problems with his right hip approximately 1 ½ years prior to entering the military service while playing racquet ball. The Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00922

    Original file (MD04-00922.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00804

    Original file (MD01-00804.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Commanding Officer's Recommendation for Discharge dtd 000504 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 000225 - 000312 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 000313 Date of Discharge: 000510 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 01...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00123

    Original file (MD01-00123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00123 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 990622: GCMCA [CG, MCRD, San Diego, CA] directed the applicant's uncharacterized discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction - erroneous due to Rhabdomyolysis. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01192

    Original file (MD99-01192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's LES upon discharge Applicant's application (DD Form 149) to BCNR dtd 4-16-99 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 970530 - 971013 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 971014 Date of Discharge: 971212 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00949

    Original file (MD04-00949.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “uncharacterized” unless there were unusual...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00748

    Original file (MD04-00748.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Hepatitis Test Results (3 pages) Copy of DD Form 214 VA Claim to NDRB (2 pages) VA Claim Applications...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00236

    Original file (MD02-00236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00236 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020109, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 950615 with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment alcohol abuse (A). By regulation, members...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00127

    Original file (MD01-00127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:American Legion's memo of 16 Apr 2001 Copy of DD Form 214 25 pages from medical and service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990714 Date of Discharge: 991202 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 04...