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

ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. 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.  The Applicant requested 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 030214.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned there was an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the characterization of the discharge shall change to HONORABLE and the narrative reason shall remain CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the Applicant introduced no issues, as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Copies of DD Form 214 (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		991104 - 000724	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000725		Date of Discharge:  010309

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  00  07  15
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  55

Highest Rank:  PVT

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.2 (2)		Conduct:  4.2 (2)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Rifle Sharpshooter Badge

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ CONDITION NOT A PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

001120:	Sports Medicine and Reconditioning Therapy (S.M.A.R.T.) Center, Camp Pendleton: New Appointment: 5 days ago, on 4 mile hike, tripped and hit Left Knee.  Diagnosis: Patella Tender, No Contusion.  Treatment: Ice/Heat, Strengthening/Power Exercise, Flexibility.  Referral: Stretching Class (M,W,F), placed on light duty for 2 days.

001127:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella Contusion/ Patella Femoral Syndrome.  Light Duty for 7 days.

001204:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: 19-year-old Marine fell 3 weeks ago onto left knee hit rock.  Still left knee pain but less frequent, still with pain on prolonged sitting with knee in flexed position.  Diagnosis: bony contusion of patella vs. chondral defect vs. Patella-Femoral Syndrome, improving on PT.

001211:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Contusion Left Knee.  Light Duty for 7 days.
 
001215:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Knee Contusion.  Fit for full duty.
 
001222:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome.  Treatment: Ice, E-stim Acute Pain, Strengthening/Power Exercises, Flexibility, NSAID'S (Motrin), Drop to SAC. 

001229:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome.  Treatment: NSAID'S (Motrin, Naprosyn, Indocin), Quads Strengthening/Power Exercise, placed on light duty for 7 days.

010104:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome.  Treatment: Ice/Heat, ROM Exercise, Strengthening/Power Exercise, Flexibility.  Referral: Stretching Class (M,W,F), placed on light duty for 14 days.

010118:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome.  Fit for full duty.

010125:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Applicant was on full duty for 7 days, Patella Femoral Syndrome symptoms continued to worsen, was lifting desk, when he couldn't hold it any longer and felt weakness, heard a pop and grinding.  Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome.  Fit for full duty.

010206:	S.M.A.R.T. Center: Follow up: Diagnosis: Patella-Femoral Syndrome, recommended for Administrative Separation.
 
010206:	Treatment failure.

010207:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  Administrative Remarks (6105) comments: "You have been diagnosed with PFPS of Right & Left Knee that hinders your ability to train."  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

 010215:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a physical condition not a disability.

010215:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

010220:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government for a condition no a physical or mental disability.  CO comments: "The factual basis for this recommendation was due to numerous medical complaints regarding his knee, reevaluated by medical authorities, they concluded that PVT D_ had patella-femoral pain syndrome in right and left knee."

000305:	GCMCA (Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton) directed the Applicant's discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of physical condition not a disability.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010309 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a physical or mental 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 with respect to the characterization (C and D).

The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the NDRB.  Subsequently, the Board reviewed the Applicant's service and medical records to determine the propriety and equity of the separation process.  While the Applicant's physical condition did warrant administrative processing for discharge, and no other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant's discharge, the Board found that his performance and conduct were above the standard required for an honorable discharge.  There were no nonjudicial proceedings, detrimental page 11 entries, or other derogatory information that would have warranted a characteri-zation less favorable than honorable.  Thus, relief with respect to characterization is granted. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 18 Aug 95), paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 “afls14.jag.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:

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