Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600577
Original file (MD0600577.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00577

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060321 . The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 20070118 . 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. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a disability.



PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Decisional Issues

No decisional issues were submitted by the Applicant.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)
Page from Department of V eterans Affairs Regional Office Rating Decision, dtd August 29, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USAR              19980528 - 19980709                        ELS
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19991130 - 19991206                         COG
         
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19991207              Date of Discharge: 20030828

Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 0 3 0 8 22
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 18

Years Contracted: 5

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 72

Highest Rank: LCPL                          MOS: 6122

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4 . 1 ( 9 )                                Conduct: 3 . 8 ( 9 )

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214) : National Defense Service Medal, Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, Letter of Appreciation, Certificate of Appreciation, Rifle qualification Badge (Marksman)


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 :


001205:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct ( Financial Irresponsibility: Writing bad checks.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided

 021212 :  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct ( Failure to take responsibility for financial obligation .), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
030424:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Unauthorized absence on 030412, 030414, 030419 and 030422 from Remedial Physical Conditioning Platoon’s daily training.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
030519:  Follow up at Smart Center (Camp Geiger) Naval Hospital Camp Lejeune by CG G_ LT MC USNR:
          Treatment to date: 8 month limited duty board. Follow up for chronic L knee pain – PFPS last seen 020918 no improvement in knee problem. Extremely non compliant.
         Impression: PFPS left knee
         Recommend Administrative Separation
          Patient displays poor motivation and extreme noncompl iant for treatment or follow up appointments.
030520:  Squadron Medical Officer, Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 26 , reported the Applicant was evaluated and treated by the Sports Medicine Department and MCAS New River Branch Medical Clinic, and was diagnosed with left knee Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome. As per Sports Medicine’s recommendation, this Marine’s condition has been unresponsive to extensive medical and physical therapy, and the patient has been non-compliant with treatment recommendations.
         Recommend administrative separation for convenience of government for a physical condition that is not a disability.
030625:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Not meeting height/weight standards because of your in ability to perform daily PT, specifically left knee Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
030701:  Applicant found physically qualified for separation.
03073 0:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The factual basis for this recommendation was a medical condition, specifically, patello-femoral pain syndrome. Applicant informed the least favorable character of service possible was as general (under honorable conditions).

030730 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights .

030730 :  Commanding Officer recommended Applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge under paragraph 6203.2.

030812 :  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.
030812 :  GCM CA directed the Applicant ’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge by reason of Convenience of the Government due to a Physical Condition not a Disability.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030828 by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a disability (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). 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 (B and C).

When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A general discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by writing bad checks, failure to take responsibility for a financial obligation and repeated unauthorized absence. The evidence of record also shows the Applicant was not recommended for promotion to corporal, but was discharged as a private first class. Therefore, the Board concluded that the Applicant was administratively reduced in rank due to professional competency or misconduct. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any relevant post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of 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 P1900.16F, 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 V, Para 502, Propriety .

C. 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501264

    Original file (MD0501264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Recommendation: Administrative separation for a chronic medical condition, not a disability. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper (B); however, the characterization of discharge was inequitable (C).The Applicant implies that her characterization 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600403

    Original file (MD0600403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls well below that required for an honorable characterization of service. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600604

    Original file (MD0600604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Period of Limited Duty: 8 months. Follow up: as needed.Final Disposition: PT is found FFD w/the following limitations – partial PT only, no running – no forced marches. Bilateral knee joint pain in the patellofemoral region, worse while walking, while running, while jumping, started gradually, occurs at rest, worse on rising from a seated position, knee joint stiffness, and a grating sensation I the knee but no knee joint swelling, able to straighten the knee, and the knee did not suddenly...

  • 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0500700

    Original file (MD0500700.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 990910 - 991114 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 991115 Date of Discharge: 001114 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600722

    Original file (MD0600722.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Advised being assigned to the Weight Control Program as of 020207), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.020318: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (concerning unsatisfactory progress on weight control program. The factual basis for this recommendation was the Applicant’s diagnosis of Bilateral Quadriceps Tendonitis, failed to meet height and weight standards while on 2nd assignment to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500955

    Original file (MD0500955.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). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00532

    Original file (MD03-00532.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00532 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030211. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of the application.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following...