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

  ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00928

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030424.  The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to ERRONEOUS.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040401.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, an impropriety in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the narrative reason of the discharge shall change.  The discharge shall change to:  UNCHARACTERIZED/SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6214.  The separation code will change to “JFF1.”

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “The following facts are germane:

1.  C_ L_ C_ (Applicant) completed DD form 2807 - 1 on 24 Sept 2001 as part of her application to join the United States Marine Corps.  On the DD 2807-1 she revealed she had “FREQUENT INDIGESTION AND HEARTBURN”, this condition is also known as Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD), she further revealed that she was taking the prescription medication “PROTONIX.”
2.  C_ L_ C_ (Applicant) entered active duty on 18 Mar 2002, approximately 6 months after revealing her GERD condition.
3.  On 21 Mar 2002 C_ L_ C_ (Applicant) was placed on light duty prior to separation from active service based upon diagnosis of GERD, and recommended for separation from active service by reason of erroneous enlistment by K. C. C_, Physician Assistant - Certified.
4.  Physical exam conducted by E_ L. D_, JR, LT/MC USNR, 2AA9027, indicates Civilian Medical Records (CMRs) reveal documented chronic GERD.
5.  Medical evaluation and recommendation forms completed by K. C. C_, PA-C dtd 2 Apr 2002 states, “Review of the DOD FORM 2808 and 2807-1 from Portland MEPS revealed…notations concerning frequent indigestion and that she had been diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease and treated with Prilosec.”

Additionally,

1.  C_ L_ C_ (Applicant's) first name should read C_ VS. C_ L_. She has no middle name.”

Documentation

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

DD Form 149
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Eleven pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		010924 - 020317	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  020318		Date of Discharge:  020412

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  00  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  5

Education Level:  8			AFQT:  80

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  None			Conduct:  None

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNCHARACTERIZED/FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

010924:	Report of medical history reports frequent indigestion or heartburn and 
that Applicant was currently taking Protonix.

020403:	Branch Medical Clinic: Diagnosis:  Gastroesophaageal reflux disease by history, EPTE.  Recommended for erroneous enlistment discharge. [Extracted from supporting documents submitted by the Applicant.]

020412:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged uncharacterized by reason of a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.3.

Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020412 with an uncharacterized by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry (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 equitable but not proper (C and D).

Issue 1.  The Board found that the Applicant was recommended for entry level separation due to an erroneous entry based upon the Applicant’s documented history of GERD.  The Board found that this action was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the Applicant.  Since the Board cannot determine if the Applicant was notified for administrative separation due to an erroneous entry, the Board cannot change the narrative reason to erroneous entry as requested by the Applicant.  Therefore, the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation is properly reassigned as secretarial authority.   Relief granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until present, paragraph 6204, DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENT AND INDUCTION.

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