Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301264
Original file (MD1301264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130515
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to: MEDICAL
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20091218 - 20100411     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100412     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100611      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 00 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 44
MOS: 8011
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /         Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP: SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

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

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education/Training:     
         Health/Medical Records:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for medical benefits.
2.       The Applicant seeks a change in his narrative reason for separation to “Medical - I njury left knee . ”

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1219            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. Based on the Applicant’s medical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome, which is considered a Condition Not a Disability , by competent medical authority, his command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel or submit a written statement .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for medical benefits. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

: ( D ecisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant seeks a change in his narrative reason for separation to “Medical - I njury left knee . ” Competent medical authority diagnosed the Applicant with patellofemoral pain syndrome while in service and recommended him for administrative discharge for a Condition Not a Disability. Per regulations, the initiation and submission of medical boards are at the discretion of the individual physician. There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. Further, the evidence of record does not indicate that proper authority erred by not initiating a medical board for the Applicant. Further, th e 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.
A n Uncharacterized discharge is warranted when separation is initiated while a member is within the first 180 days of continuous active duty except when the characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) is authorized or Honorable is clearly warranted. The Applicant had no misconduct that would rate an UOTHC discharge, and there was no evidence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance that would merit an Honorable characterization. Since the Applicant served only 61 days, an Uncharacterized discharge is the most appropriate characterization of service. Relief denied.

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 Th erefore, 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disable d American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review.
Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.
Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200527

    Original file (MD1200527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 Jun 2006, the Applicant’s Regimental Commander endorsed his administrative separation package and on 9 June 2006, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Personality Disorder. Relief warranted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found the Therefore, the awarded...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002218

    Original file (MD1002218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation by reason of a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.When notified of administrative separation processing, the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative board, but waived his right to submit a written statement.The administrative board determined the evidence supported the misconduct and recommended separation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201085

    Original file (MD1201085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1200312

    Original file (ND1200312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of service included for of the Uniform Code of Military...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200312

    Original file (ND1200312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of service included for of the Uniform Code of Military...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301271

    Original file (MD1301271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB did not find any reference to a medical diagnosis of PTSD or TBI in the Applicant’s service record to support such a claim, and the Applicant did not provide any documentary evidence of a medical diagnosis by competent medical authorities to support such conditions.In the 10 April 2007 letter documenting his 06 April 2007 psychiatric evaluation, he was not determined to be suffering from PTSD or TBI. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400745

    Original file (MD1400745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the available records and statements submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined PTSD and TBI did not mitigate his misconduct. Relief denied.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201619

    Original file (ND1201619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USN (DEP) 19970916 - 19980513 Active: 19980514 - 20011114 HON USN 20011115 - 20061215 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Appointment: 20061216Age: 30Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20120531 Highest Rank: LTLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 16 Day(s) Education Level: AFQT: 97Officer’s Fitness reports: AvailableAwards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500201

    Original file (ND1500201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600997

    Original file (MD0600997.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, relief is not warranted on the mere fact that the Applicant had no documented misconduct.However, in conducting its review, the Board determined from the record that the Applicant’s diagnosis of pes planus was accurate, that he did not contribute to creating the condition, that he was compliant with all medical and therapeutic efforts to overcome his condition, that discharge was appropriate, that under the circumstances of the his case any “significant negative aspects of his...