Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00412
Original file (MD02-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. 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. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Austin, TX. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area. The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 021022. 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/ CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted
1. My discharge was improper because I was told that since I was being discharged under medical terms I would receive a general/under honorable conditions. No disabilities were appointed to me after the 7 months of pain I carried in my feet and term of service. The Corpsman in Boot Camp MCRD told me I had flat feet and the navy athletic doctors in 52 Area Camp Pendleton told me I had flat feet. Everything in their ability was done to try and fix my feet in the SOI except surgery. I wish for my discharge to be changed so I can apply for the Hazlewood Act. So I may have my college paid for as promised by my recruiter SSgt W_ for enlisting in Texas. Also I wish for the Board to approve me for any disabilities I may claim.

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: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                001003 - 001105  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 001106               Date of Discharge: 010614

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 07 08
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 45

 Highest Rank: Pvt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.2 (1)                       Conduct: 4.2 (1)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Sharpshooter Badge

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNCHARACTERIZED/CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

010220:  S.M.A.R.T. Center: Pain for 4-5 weeks. Diagnosis - pes planus/plantar fasciatis, treatment explained.

010226:  S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow-up. 19 year male complains of foot pain for 5-6 years, aggravated in Boot Camp. Pt states wearing comfortable boots, flat feet. Treatment explained, placed on light duty for 7 days.

010228:  S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow-up. Pt states continued problem, complains of cold toes. Decreased circulation to toes. Treatment explained, continued light duty for 7 days.
010306:  S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow-up. Symptoms persist but some little improvement. Treatment explained, placed on light duty for 10 days.

010315:  S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow-up. Complaint unresolved. Foot pain for 13 years. Pt relates having insoles at age 6. Pt relates arch pain and sore soles. Pt non-compliant with insoles. Treatment explained. Light duty 7 days.

010315:  Branch Medical Clinic, San Onofre MCB: 19 year recruit with symptoms of being depressed 4½ months, home problems, job problems, more depressed after visiting parents. Same 5 years, no treatment, poor appetite, poor sleep, wants to see psychiatrist; suicidal thoughts. Positive plan - "take a gun from a guard, I know how to do it," homicidal ideation a lot, "every f- guy." Negative for alcohol, drugs. Positive peer & family models for suicide.
         Assessment: Depression, suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation.
         Plan: Pt agrees to not harm self or others while waiting for appointment but will contact clinic, chaplain, command, NHCY, ER, 911, etc, if situation gets worse. Place on medication.

010322:  Branch Medical Clinic, San Onofre MCB: Pt still gets anger, positive homicidal thoughts. Negative plan, no one in particular. No psychiatric appt. yet. No problems exercising at gym. Pt can still agree with contract for safety.
         Assessment: Depression.
         Plan: Continue medication, return to counseling if any problems occurs.

010327:  Mental Health Consultation (Psychologist): No psychosis or psychopathology. Responds well to Paxil.
         Diagnosis: Depression NOS (Resolving). At present, considered fit for full duty psychologically. No further treatment in this clinic is deemed necessary or desired.

010328:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [having been diagnosed with pes planus that hinders ability to train]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

010328:  Pt considered treatment failure with the S.M.A.R.T Center. No further treatment options are available at this time.
010412:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for an uncharacterized discharge by reason of convenience of the government for a physical condition not a disability and as a result of being diagnosed as a treatment failure due to pes planus (flat feet).
010412:  Applicant advised of 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.

010412:  Commanding Officer recommended uncharacterized discharge by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a physical or mental disability. The factual basis for this recommendation was the result of numerous medical complaints to medical authorities regarding his pes planus (flat feet).

010417:  Applicant placed on voluntary leave for indefinite period while administrative separation was reviewed.
010523:  GCMCA [CG, MCB, Camp Pendleton, CA] directed the Applicant's uncharacterized discharge for convenience of the government by reason of physical condition not a disability.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010614 with an uncharacterized discharge 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. By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment (determined from the date of notification of processing for separation) 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 seven months in the military to warrant a change of discharge. With respect to non-service related administrative matters, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) characterization. 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Relief not warranted.

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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is 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 “ 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00106

    Original file (ND01-00106.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. I never had problems with my knee before training.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00066

    Original file (ND99-00066.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    code on my discharge papers changed to an R.E.-3 so that I may go back in Please consider me for re-enlistment into the U.S. Navy by changing the R.E. 971217: Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes evaluation (podiatry): Diagnosis - Pes Planus with symptoms, entry level medical separation for EPTE condition. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge and the reason for discharge was proper and...

  • 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,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01197

    Original file (PD2013 01197.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The bilateral foot condition, characterized as “chronic left and right foot pain (pes planus)” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The requested knee, back, weight gain, mental health, and substance abuse conditions were not identified by the PEB, and thus are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board.The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his service-connected condition continues to burden...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00707

    Original file (PD2009-00707.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA considered the CI’s foot conditions (Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis with Pes Planus) as combining for foot disability IAW VASRD §4.71a-29 using rating Code 5276 Flatfoot; acquired and awarded the CI with a rating of 30% (severe, bilateral). The Board considered the overlap of foot symptoms from the two inter-related conditions (Plantar Fasciitis and Pes Planus) and rating as a single bilateral code of 5276 at 30% (severe, bilateral) as the VA rated the combined foot conditions. After...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 02512

    Original file (PD2013 02512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The feetcondition, characterized as “ bilateral pes planus,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBadjudicated “ chronic bilateral foot pain”as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to...

  • 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 | CY2014 | PD-2014-01418

    Original file (PD-2014-01418.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI’s chronic bilateral foot pain, chronic low back pain (LBP), plantar fasciitis and pes planus conditions were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The IPEB did not address the remaining conditions (plantar fasciitis, pes planus and adjustment disorder).The CI appealed to the Formal PEB (FPEB) which reaffirmed the IPEB’s findings for the chronic low back condition as unfitting, rated at 10%, but changed the chronic foot pain (bilateral) diagnosis to bilateral...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00925

    Original file (PD2013 00925.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The “chronic pain, multiples cites [ sic ]”characterized as “mechanical thoracic and lumbar back pain,, “right knee pain,” “right ankle pain,” “right foot sesamoiditis and metatarsalgia,”“left knee pain,” and “left foot and ankle pain,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. Bilateral knee condition . X-rays were normal for both knees.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01061

    Original file (PD-2013-01061.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The VA C&P examination summarized the CI’s prior right knee injury noting no specific or additional complaints. The condition was not listed on the permanent profile nor implicated in the commander’s statement.After...