DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 460-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (NR20200000460) (2) Headquarters Marine Corps, Manpower Management Integration Branch, Manpower and Reserve Affairs (M&RA) ltr of 31 Mar 20 (3) Colonel (ret) ltr of 22 Apr 20 (4) Headquarters Marine Corps, Manpower Management Integration Branch, Manpower and Reserve Affairs (M&RA) ltr of 23 Apr 20 1. Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board, requesting correction to his record to reflect that he was in an active duty status on 12-13 June 2008, and on 17-18 June 2008. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 5 May 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of his naval service records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board also considered the applicable Advisory Opinions and Petitioner’s response. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to the allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy were exhausted. b. It is in the interest of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner served honorably in the Marine Corps Reserve until his retirement. In 2008, while in a reserve status, Petitioner received verbal orders to receive a colonoscopy as part of a medical screening in anticipation of Individual Augmentation (IA) orders. Petitioner subsequently reported to National Naval Medical Center for the medical procedures; no written orders were executed. d. Phosphate-based colonoscopy preparations were used during the 2008 medical procedures performed at . The preparations have since been removed from the market because they were known to cause Acute Phosphate Nephropathy, a form of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD). In 2009, Petitioner was discovered to have substantially decreased kidney function, which was diagnosed as CKD. Petitioner’s application requests that his record be corrected to reflect that he was in an active duty status on 12-13 June 2008 and 17-18 June 2008, the periods covering the two colonoscopy procedures. Petitioner states that this corrective action would allow the injury in question to be declared service-related. e. On 31 March 2020, Headquarters Marine Corps, Manpower Management Integration Branch, Manpower and Reserve Affairs (M&RA) issued an Advisory Opinion, enclosure (2). The 31 March 2020 Advisory Opinion found that there are no source documents to verify Petitioner’s claim of being in an active duty status on 12-13 June 2008, and on 17-18 June 2008. The Advisory Opinion was provided to Petitioner, who responded on 22 April 2020, enclosure (3). In his response, Petitioner states that the fact that no record exists at M&RA is precisely the problem. He points out that the Advisory Opinion does not refute his sworn statement that he acted under verbal instruction from M&RA to obtain a pre-deployment physical. Additionally, Petitioner cites MARADMIN 636/11, which was issued in 2011 to address the specific problem of Individual Ready Reserve Marines executing verbal directives in anticipation of mobilization without the receipt of written orders, resulting in the loss of benefits due to lack of duty status at the time of the execution of the verbal directives. f. On 23 April 2020, M&RA issued a second Advisory Opinion, enclosure (4), which considered MARADMIN 636/11. The second Advisory Opinion concludes that Petitioner was one of the Reserve Component Marines who unfortunately fell into the situation of having been issued verbal orders without the benefit of a written order to document the period of duty performed. Based on the fact that the Marine Corps subsequently issued a policy to halt this practice, M&RA concludes that it is reasonable to assume that Petitioner was in receipt of verbal orders and was in an authorized duty status at the time of the 2008 medical procedures. g. The Board considered the request for an update to Petitioner’s record to reflect that he was in an authorized active duty status for the two periods of service covering the 2008 medical procedures. The Board noted both Advisory Opinions and considered Petitioner’s submissions to the Board, to include his rebuttal to the first Advisory Opinion from M&RA. CONCLUSION: The Board granted Petitioner full relief with respect to the request to a change his record to reflect that he was in an active duty status on 12-13 June 2008 and 17-18 June 2008, during which he underwent medical procedures as part of his pre-deployment screening process. RECOMMENDATION: In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: That Petitioner’s record be corrected to show that he was in an active duty status on 12-13 June 2008, and on 17-18 June 2008. That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 6 January 2020. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 5/29/2020