Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00217
Original file (MD02-00217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00217

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020108, 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 020731. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

 1. I am uncertain how this will effect the review of my record but I have enclosed a medical report from a civilian doctor disproving the asthma finding that is in my military medical record.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of pulmonary function study dated February 3, 1999
DD Form 149 dated July 31, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                950920 - 960825  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960826               Date of Discharge: 970423

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 07 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 51

 Highest Rank: Pvt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 2.5 (2)              Conduct: 4.0 (1)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970325:  Medical evaluation by LT, GMO, Camp Geiger Branch Medical Clinic:
         AXIS I: Asthma.
970325:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Substandard performance as evidenced by a lack of strength and endurance. This lack of strength and endurance interferes with the effective performance of duties. At the time applicant is unable to participate in training which includes even minimal amounts of physical exertion. He may be suffering from a physical condition or injury beyond his control.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
970409:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a physical condition not a disability.
970409:  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.

970410:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a physical or mental disability. The factual basis for this recommendation was a physical condition which is so severe that the ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.

970422:  GCMCA [Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] directed the applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of physical condition not a disability.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970423 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a physical or mental disability (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. The Board does not consider the circumstances surrounding the applicant’s stated condition and implied incorrect diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to warrant an upgrade to his characterization of service. The applicant was diagnosed with asthma by a competent medical authority on 970325. The applicant’s proficiency markings were not sufficient for an honorable characterization of service. The applicant’s chain of command believed the applicant had no ambition to be a Marine. Relief denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. 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. The applicant 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. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 18 Aug 95), paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT .

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      

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00674

    Original file (MD99-00674.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DD214 says only "discharge". 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).In the applicant’s issue, the Board found that the applicant believes that he should have received an Honorable discharge. The Board also found that the applicant indicated, on his enlistment physical and boot camp physical, that he did not have asthma, when in fact he did as evidence...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00121

    Original file (MD03-00121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00121 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021022, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to non-involuntary. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Documentation In addition to the service record (there was NO...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01285

    Original file (MD03-01285.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record (there was only a PARTIAL DISCHARGE PACKAGE), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant’s father Report of office visit to Orthopedic Associates of Dallas, LLP dated December 7, 2000 (4 pp.) By regulation, members discharged within the first 180...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00151

    Original file (MD02-00151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00151 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I was instructed to send form DD 149 to the Board for Correction of Naval Records explaining reasons for my request that my military record be corrected to reflect an Honorable Discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00810

    Original file (MD02-00810.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00810 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 not equitable with respect to the characterization (C and D).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the NDRB. While the Applicant's...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00369

    Original file (MD03-00369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. By regulation, members who are processed for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “uncharacterized” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct which would merit an “honorable” characterization. The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his six months in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00299

    Original file (MD04-00299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “convenience of the government”. If member is unable to train and returns for same condition, member is recommended for administrative separation for the good of the USMC.”000420: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00412

    Original file (MD02-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00412 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/Under Honorable Conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (4 copies) Copy of DD Form 215 (2 copies) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00570

    Original file (MD02-00570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00570 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020311, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Request that this injustice be corrected by upgrading (Applicant) discharge from General Discharge (under Honorable Conditions) to an Honorable Discharge (under Honorable Conditions). Light duty for 2 days.991122: Branch Medical Clinic: A: Resolving left ankle sprain.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00295

    Original file (MD04-00295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00295 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031201. My whole life was changed as result of this accident and I should have received an honorable discharge under medical conditions. The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his time in the military to warrant a change to “honorable.” The official records and the additional documents supplied by the Applicant, do not support his contention of a “cover up”...