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

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00851

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050419.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government.  The Applicant requests 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 20050819.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of and the reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNCHARACTERIZED/CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“Issue #1: I tried to serve but I was not allowed to do so and so warrants an upgrade to Honorable.  I had no medical problems with my left hip and right knee when I entered the service.  The stress fracture to the left hip and right knee occurred as a result of required training.  See line #14 for more issues.

Issue #2:  A medical problem impaired my ability to serve and so warrants an upgrade to Honorable. It was the decision of the USMC to discharge me because the time frame for complete recovery and reconditioning was considered to be extensive.

Issue #3: I received no NJP’s/Article 15’s or engaged in misconduct and so warrants an upgraded to Honorable.  A review of my service record will confirm that I complied with all requirements and orders that were given to me.

Issue #4:  My Trainee Discharge should have been Honorable and so warrants an upgrade to Honorable.  My discharge was not due to displanitary problems but was due to medical disability that could have been foreseen at the time of entry into service.  See attached sheet.

Issue #5:  The Narrative Reason for Separation is in error and so warrants an upgrade to Honorable.  The Commanding Officer’s recommendation was a separation for Convenience of Government.

Issue #6:  The Character of Service as uncharacterized is in error and so warrants an upgrade to Honorable.  The Separation Code of JVF1 is defined under the military separation code as a physical condition that is not disabling.  This is also an involuntary discharge under USMC regulations. The Narrative Reason for Separation also states that the condition is not a disability.  This was an arbitrary decision that was made because of the long projected recovery time from the hip and knee stress fractures.  This decision was solely based on the medical condition and not my character of service.

Issue #7:  I have been awarded service connected disability compensation and so warrants an upgrade to honorable.  An administrative Review was made by the VA on my claim to establish service-connection determined that my character of service was honorable.           

Mr. J_ M. O_ (Applicant)
27W347 Washington Avenue
Winfield, Il. 60190
SS# --- --  ----  “

Documentation

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

Notification and Acknowledgement of Separation Proceeding, April 22, 2004
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Department of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision, September 7, 2004
12 pages from the Applicant’s Health Record
Battalion Drop Counseling (Note Record), signed by Maj D_B.M_, April 19, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		031118 - 040104	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  040105		Date of Discharge:  040427

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  00  03  23
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  41

Highest Rank:  PVT			MOS: 9900

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  NA*		Conduct:  NA*

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*Not available.

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

UNCHARACTERIZED/CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

040415:	Medical evaluation by BMC MCRD San Diego, CA. 
	Chief Complaint: Chronic left hip pain and right knee pain.
	Verification Process:  Review of health records to include radiographs, bone scans and outpatient visits.  This recruit sustained stress fractures to his pelvis and right tibia.  He is expected to have a full recovery from his injuries, however the time frame for complete recovery and reconditioning to return to train will be extensive.  Recommend ELS for full recovery at home.
Diagnosis: Left inferior pubic rami stress fracture, right tibial plateau stress fx. 
Referred for administrative entry level separation.  Member’s present condition is considered “not physically qualified” in accordance with the physical standards for enlistment, as opposed to physical unfitness by reason of disability, as defines in Appendix (A) of SECNAVINST 1850-4E (Disability Evaluation Manual).

040419:	Commanding Officer, Support Battalion, Recruit Training Regiment, MCRD San Diego, CA recommended discharge with a service characterization of uncharacterized by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a disability.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  Arrived MCRD on 5 Jan 04.  On 9 Jan, IST Score 10/52/11:15, dropped to 2154G.  On 18 Feb, T-30 dropped to MRP for Left Hip and Knee Stress Fracture.  SNR sustained a stress fracture to his pelvis and right tibia.  SNR is expected to have full recovery from his injuries, however the time frame for complete recovery and reconditioning to return will be extensive (eight months).  On 15 Apr, BMC MCRD recommended ELS due to diagnosis of Left Inferior Pubic Rami Stress Fracture and Right Tibial Plateau Stress Fracture.  SNR’s condition verified by a review of health records to included radiographs, bone scan, and outpatient visits.  SNR “Not Physicially Qualified” in accordance with the physical standards for enlistment.  Medically cleared for ELS on 16 Apr.  RS Chicago notified by BN XO.

040422:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an Entry Level Separation by reason of convenience of the government-physical condition not a disability. The factual basis for this recommendation is convenience of the government-physical condition not a disability due to your medial condition: Left Inferior Pubic Rami Stress Fracture.   

040422:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

040426:	GCMCA, Commanding General, MCRD San Diego, CA, directed the Applicant's discharge with a service characterization of uncharacterized by convenience of the government, left inferior pubic rami stress fracture (MARCORPSEPMAN. PAR 6230.2, Physical Condition Not a Disability). 

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040427 with a service characterization of uncharacterized by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a disability (A).   After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).

On 20040415 the Applicant was examined and diagnosed by a competent medical authority with a left inferior pubic rami stress fracture and right tibial plateau stress fracture.  The medical officer further stated that the time frame for complete recovery and reconditioning to return to train would be extensive and he recommended that the Applicant be discharged with an Entry Level Service characterization for full recovery at home.  On 20040422, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended to the Commanding General that the Applicant be discharged by convenience of the government-physical condition not a disability.  According to the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORPSEPMAN) paragraph 6203, convenience of the government is one of the reasons a commander may recommend involuntary separation of a Marine before the Marine’s expiration of current contract.  Physical condition not a disability, paragraph 6203.2, is a specific reason under the category of convenience of the government.  Whenever a Marine’s performance deteriorates or has an adverse effect on others in the unit, commanding officers and subordinate leaders will try to determine the cause.  When the command suspects a physical condition interferes with the Marine’s effective performance of duty, the Marine should be referred to the appropriate medical authority.  If examination by a medical officer confirms that the Marine is suffering from a physical condition apparently beyond the individual’s control and indicates that the condition is not a disability, separation proceedings should be initiated.  In the Applicant’s case, the administrative processing and subsequent discharge was in compliance with regulations and is therefore proper and equitable.  Relief is not warranted.

By regulation, members notified of intended recommendation for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are eligible for an uncharacterized or entry-level separation characterization of service.  Unless there were unusual circumstances regarding a servicemember’s performance or conduct that would merit an honorable characterization, an uncharacterized discharge is generally considered the most appropriate characterization of a member’s service.  The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 4 months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.

The Applicant should be aware that, with respect to nonservice-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits, and especially civilian employment, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

For the Applicant’s edification, the Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  While the Veterans Administration determined that the Applicant had a service connection for lumbosacral strain, and granted him an evaluation of 10 percent, there is no reference to the Applicant’s characterization of service.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an 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 other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective 
01 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 V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		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