Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01211
Original file (MD04-01211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD04-01211

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040715. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests 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 20041222. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB found that the discharge was proper but not equitable. The Board’s vote was 4 to 1 that the character of the discharge shall change to HONORABLE /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:

“I would like my discharge to be upgraded because at the beginning I was going to ge honorable discharge and then my platoon 1stSgt wanted to have it changed. I was a good marine with no bad marks ever in my SRB. My conduct marks have always been good. I did not have a copy of my SRB with me. I was a good marine and always put 110% in everything that I did. I couldn’t help that I got hurt. I wanted the Admin Sep. way because it was faster and I was ready to get on with my life. I never did anything bad in the military. I never got bad conduct marks and in a way I think my unit company didn’t want me getting full honorable b/c they always gave me a hard time for being hurt and not being able to fulfill my marine duties.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Notification of Separation Proceedings, (3 pages) dtd Nov 18, 2003
Copy of Memorandum from Officer in Charge, 14 Area Group Aid Station, 1 st Force          Service Support Group, (not signed) dtd 29 Oct 03
Copy of results of Imaging Services bone scan, dtd 10/24/2002
Copy of Medical Board Notification, (not signed) dtd 1 July 03
Copy of SJA Review and GCMCA Endorsement of recommended discharge, dtd Feb       12, 2004


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                020719 - 020825  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 020826               Date of Discharge: 040218

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 05 23
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rank: LCpl                         MOS: 0612

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.3 (3)              Conduct: 4.3 (3)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, RMB

 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 :

021024:  Bone scan conducted at Low County Medical Group, Beaufort, SC.
         Impression: Stress fracture of the left inferior pubic ramus; correlation with conventional radiographs may be useful.
030701:  Medical Board Notification ICO: PFC A_E.S_ [Applicant]. SNM has been evaluated and has appeared before a Medical Board convened at Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, CA.
Diagnosis: left patellofemoral pain syndrome/pelvic structure.
Limitations are: no strenuous running, marching, PFTs, and PT at own pace.
Anticipated disposition of the Medical Board is: Limited Duty for 8 months.
031028:  Evaluation at Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton Orthopedics Clinic: left knee pain, left hip pain, pain continues. Limited duty started 030701. Recommend Administrative Separation under Marine Corps Order 1900.16D.
        
031029:  Medical Officer Recommendation for Administrative Separation of LCPL A_E.S_ [Applicant]. “The above SNM [Applicant] has been evaluated for and has been found to have a physical condition, not disability. The SNM has been through extensive evaluation by a competent medical authority for this condition and has aggressively attempted to comply with medical’s recommendation for rehabilitation of the condition without significant improvement, as such this condition is considered beyond the individuals control. If the SNM is retained on active duty, the command needs to realize that her condition may prevent her from fulfilling the duties and responsibilities of her rank and MOS, and that the SNM may be on and off Light Duty for remainder of their tour.”

031117:  Evaluation at Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital, Mental Health Department.
         Axis I: Major Depressive disorder/chronic
         Axis II: Personality Disorder NOS
         Axis III: Interior pubic/ramus/fxr (resolving), with Border-line traits
         Axis IV: Military lifestyle
         Axis V: GAF 55
         Plan/Recommendations:
1.       No access to weapons.
2.       Service Member is unsuitable for further military service.
3.       Administrative Separation is recommended for this member. This member manifests a longstanding disorder of character and behavior, which is of such severity as to render her incapable of serving adequately in the military. The member does not require and will not benefit from hospitalization. Although not an immediate risk to self and others at this time, this member is judged to be a continual risk of harm to self/if retained on active duty. This member is deemed fit to return to duty to be processed for Administrative Separation. This Administrative Separation should be initiated in accordance with MCO 6203.3 and MILPERSMAN 1910-122.
031229:  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.
031231:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected 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.

040115:  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 the ”medical officer’s examination confirming your [Applicant] physical condition not a disability.”

040129:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

040212:  GCMCA, Commanding General, 1 st Force Service Support Group, 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 20040218 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).

The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service record should have been the “type warranted by service record’. A review of the Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted. The Applicant’s performance and behavior were above the standard required for an honorable discharge and there was no adverse information that would have warranted a less favorable characterization. Therefore, relief 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .
D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00617

    Original file (MD00-00617.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Determines condition is a "physical condition" and "not a disability". st MarDiv(Rein)] directed the applicant's discharge under Honorable conditions (General) by reason of a physical condition not a disability. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971031 under Honorable conditions (General) by reason of Convenience of the government due to condition not a physical or mental disability (A).

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501424

    Original file (MD0501424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Although this Marine is being evaluated for possible personality disorder the basis for this separation request is only “eating disorder” (see 26 March medical evaluation). The basis for this recommendation is her diagnosis of severe Eating Disorder, as supported by CDR M_ (Psychiatrist) evaluations of 26 Mar 03, 3 Feb 03, 7 Jan 03, 18 Dec 02 and 16 Dec 02.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00794

    Original file (MD02-00794.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00794 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020515, 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 Naval Discharge Review Board of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the contentions as set forth by the Applicant, in his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01206

    Original file (MD04-01206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I take a lot of pride in the fact that I was a Marine, and if the saying holds true, Once a Marine, Always a Marine, I want to know my time in service was considered Honorable.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Applicant’s DD Form 214 Standard Form 180 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...

  • 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”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500851

    Original file (MD0500851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION On 20040422, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended to the Commanding General that the Applicant be discharged by convenience of the government-physical condition not a disability. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 4 months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00602

    Original file (MD04-00602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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 found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500885

    Original file (MD0500885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. With continued complaints of the same condition it is recommended that the patient be administratively separated from the United States Marine Corps due to an inability to perform his duties.”040528: Officer-In-Charge, Headquarters Battalion, 1 st Marine Division (Rear), notified Applicant of intended recommendation for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00678

    Original file (PD2009-00678.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Antalgic gait; Neurostimulator in place§4.71a Rating10%20%20%20%The MEB exam on 18 October 2006, four months prior to separation, indicated the CI had an antalgic gait, positive SLR, and subjective numbness to the left groin. Although the VA exam did not document antalgic gait, it met the ROM criteria for a 20% evaluation and the Board could not reasonably consider different portions of different exams for a less favorable rating. In the matter of the GERD condition, or any other medical...