Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801302
Original file (MD0801302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080529
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN (CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY)

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19990819 - 20000123              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20000124               Period of Enlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 20000824
Length of Service: Yrs Mths 01 D ys     Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 80
MOS: 9900        Highest Rank:                     Fitness Reports:
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):      ( )/ ( )
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle

Periods of UA/CONF:

Medical:         1
         Applicant recommended for an administrative separation for Mild Pes Planus, Sesamoiditis, Metatarsalgia, both feet.
6105 Counseling:
UNDATED :         For mild flanus, sesamoiditis, metatarsaigia, both feet.
20000621 : For mild pes flanus, sesamoiditis, metatarsalgia, both feet.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education/Training:     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements From Applicant:             From Representation:              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe) Department of Veterans Affairs service connected compensation decision.

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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Passage of time since discharge.
2. Medical disability payments from Veterans Affairs.

Decision

 Date: 20080821            Location: Washington D.C.        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY .
Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends she is entitled to a discharge upgrade because of her clean record for the past eight years. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides a discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Supporting documentation that could have been submitted for consideration by the Board include, but is not limited to: evidence of a verifiable long-term employment record; evidence of a drug-free existence; documentation of educational pursuits; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; and documentation of financial stability or evidence of good standing with financial institutions or credit card company’s. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The Applicant provided no documentation for the Board to consider for review. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.
For the information of the Applicant, the discharge she received was “Uncharacterized.” This is the characterization given to Marines whose discharge is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active duty unless exceptionally meritorious service is documented or a lesser discharge is warranted. The Applicant’s record of service shows honest and faithful service, but it does not meet the high standard required to characterize an entry-level separation as honorable. With respect to non-service related administrative matters, i.e., DVA benefits, civilian employment, etc., an uncharacterized separation shall be considered as the equivalent of an honorable or general discharge.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends receipt of VA disability payments justifies a discharge upgrade. As stated above, VA benefits are available to members with an “Uncharacterized” discharge. The Board determined there is no justification to warrant an upgrade as the narrative reason properly reflects the reason for the discharge.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001, 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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court-martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons.” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - 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 may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: 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

  • 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024166

    Original file (20100024166.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no available evidence showing that the DVA has rated the applicant's medical condition. An award or change in the disability rating granted by the DVA would not call into question the application of the fitness standards and the disability ratings assigned by proper military medical authorities during the applicant’s processing through the Army PDES based on the medical evidence and the severity of a condition as it existed at the time. As a result, absent any evidence the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901368

    Original file (MD0901368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was administratively separated due to on-going medical issues. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00579

    Original file (PD2009-00579.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Other Conditions. In the matter of the bilateral plantar fasciitis condition, the Board unanimously recommends combining the condition and rating with the chronic bilateral sesamoiditis with left foot sesamoid shift condition as a combined unfitting condition, and the Board unanimously recommends that these conditions be coded as a separation rating of 10% for the left chronic plantar fasciitis/sesamoiditis with sesamoid shift condition coded 5284, and a separation rating of 20% for the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01026

    Original file (PD 2014 01026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The PEB adjudicated “hallux limitus”as unfitting rating each great toe separately at 10% with a 20% combined rating, which included the bilateral factor. The remainder of the foot and ankle examination was normal.The MEB NARSUM concluded with diagnoses of hallux limitus (decreased motion of the toe) and metatarsal head metatarsalgia (pain at the base of the great toe). There was painful motion of the great toes, but the remainder of the foot...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01261

    Original file (PD-2013-01261.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DoDI 6040.44 provides for consideration of post-separation VA findings, particularly within 12 months of separation, although the Board’s recommendation is premised on the degree of disability at separation. The VA’s (belated) 10% rating was under code 5284 (foot injuries, other) for “moderate disability,” which offers a 20% rating for “moderately severe” and 30% for “severe.”Members agreed, that IAW VASRD §4.7 (higher of two evaluations), 5003 was not the optimal code for rating in this...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02429

    Original file (PD-2013-02429.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 the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Bilateral Sesamoiditis and Back Pain5099-500310%Bilateral Foot Condition5299-52780%20050113Back Condition5299-5237NSC20050105Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 2 Rating: 10%Rating: 0%Derived from VA Rating Decision...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000168

    Original file (MD1000168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.The Applicant requested, and was recommended by an appropriately credentialed medical health care provider, to be separated from the Marine Corps by Convenience of the Government due to a physical condition, not a disability. Based on a review of the Applicant’s administrative...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300759

    Original file (MD1300759.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100545

    Original file (ND1100545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...