Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00602
Original file (MD04-00602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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




ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00602

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040225. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.


Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041001. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The NDRB did find, however, that the Applicant’s discharge was inequitably characterized. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change to: HONORABLE. The Narrative Reason shall remain: CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “I believe my discharge to be improper due to the following reasons: During my three years and four months of service, I never received an NJP or Court Martial. I earned my good conduct medal and my last pro/con marks were 4.6/4.7. Both my OIC and SNCOIC stated that I am a hard worker and strive for perfection. The Medical Officers that it would be best for my health and to the Marine Corps’ benefit to discharge me. I was informed by my 1
st Sgt that with a General Discharge I would still be able to use the G.I. Bill. I signed the discharge papers in the confidence that I would not lose my benefits. Had I know I would not be able to use the G.I. Bill, I would have remained on active duty for my remaining seven months of enlistment and remained on light duty.”


Documentation

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

Proficiency and conduct markings sheet, undated
Recommendation for administrative separation dtd 10 Apr 02




PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                980727 - 990621  COG

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 990622               Date of Discharge: 021010

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 19
         Inactive: None

Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 57

Highest Rank: LCpl                         MOS: 1316

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency: 4.4                  Conduct: 4.3 [extracted from SJA letter of 020926]

Military Decorations: None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

020410:  Medical Officer recommended separation for physical condition not a disability due to a physical condition apparently beyond the individuals control. SNM has been treated for the following conditions: Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Patellar Femoral Syndrome, Limb Length Discrepancy, Lumbar Segmental Dysfunction, Gastroespheogeal Reflex Disorder, Bilateral Subluxing Shoulders, 2/6 Systolic Heart Murmur, Right Sternoclavicular Joint Subtcutaneous Nodule. SNM has had surgery along with repeated light duty periods, limited duty boards and rehabilitative modalities. There has been little or no improvement of his condition during treatment/rehabilitative period. Member is still unable to perform full duties as a Marine.

020918:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a disability.

020918:  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.

020923:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a disability. The factual basis for this recommendation was based upon his medically documented conditions of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Patellar Femoral Syndrome, Limb Length Discrepancy, Lumbar Segmental Dysfunction, Gastroespheogeal Reflex Disorder, Bilateral Subluxing Shoulders, 2/6 Systolic Heart Murmur, Right Sternoclavicular Joint Subtcutaneous Nodule.

020926:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

020930:  GCMCA [CG 2FSSG] directed the Applicant's discharge
with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of condition not a disability.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20021010 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a 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 but not equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.
The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.” A review of Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted. Applicant’s performance and behavior marks were above the standard required for an honorable discharge and there was no adverse information that would have warranted any other characterization of his service. Therefore, relief to the character of service is granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective
01 September 2001 and Present), 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

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00901

    Original file (PD2012 00901.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although symptoms did improve with medication, a P3 profile due to “sleeping disorder” was recorded on 2 November 2002, limiting the CI to “no driving vehicles, handling ammunition, firing weapons or performing duties requiring concentration or alertness.” The commander’s performance statement letter, dated 14 March 2003,records that the limitation of duties for narcolepsy prohibits assignments in which “sudden incapacitation would be dangerous to self or others.” The narrative summary...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00433

    Original file (PD2013 00433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The ratings for the unfitting gunshot wound of left posterior thigh group, the existed prior to service (EPTS) Ehlers-Danlos condition, and not unfitting conditions of multiple joint arthralgias and situational depression are addressed below;no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board.Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01247

    Original file (PD2010-01247.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty TSgt/E-6 (3S051, Personnel) medically separated for Type II Ehlers Danlos Syndrome (EDS), with chronic wrist and knee pain. The PEB adjudicated the Type II EDS, with chronic wrist and knee pain conditions, as unfitting, rated 20%, with application of the Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Nearly two years after separation right...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01788

    Original file (PD-2014-01788.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The bowel and hip conditions, characterized as “irritable bowel syndrome [IBS] with chronic pain and bloating” and “snapping hip syndrome,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. Snapping Hip Syndrome . The DA Form 2173( Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status ),dated 14 December 2005, noted complaints of bilateral hip pain during mobilization training in August 2004, with increasing hip pain due to the weight of gear and weight loss.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00180

    Original file (MD03-00180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was told that in order to have anything done about my knees, I would need to upgrade my discharge.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR (J) 000823 - 010521 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 010522 Date of Discharge: 011129 Length of...

  • 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00467

    Original file (MD02-00467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00467 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020226, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contentions as set forth by the appellant as follows; an upgrade of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01503

    Original file (MD03-01503.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 “ for convience of the Govt. The service record clearly documents the Applicant’s discharge was by reason of Physical Condition Not a Disability . The Applicant should be aware, however, that the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16, lists “Physical Condition Not a Disability” as a type of “Convenience of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00607

    Original file (MD04-00607.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00893

    Original file (MD04-00893.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00893 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040505. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Issue 2: Again for the Applicant’s edification, in order to receive a good conduct medal, which the Applicant is not qualified to receive, a Marine must have “3 years of continuous active service.” The Applicant was only in the Marine Corps for seven months and six days, which is well...