Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203704100
JRE
Docket No: 3992-97
20 May 1999
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 6 May 1999.
were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
Your allegations of error and injustice
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
The Board found that you served in the Navy from 6 to 21 March 1996, when you were
discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment, with an entry level separation, because of your
failure to meet procurement physical standards due to somatoform pain disorder. As you had
not completed 180 days of continuous active service when discharge processing was begun,
you did not qualify for an honorable discharge.
The Board carefully considered your contention and accompanying medical evidence which
indicates that your pain may have been due to sciatic neuropathy resulting from an injection
you received while on active duty, but found it insufficient to warrant any corrective action
in your case.
In this regard it noted that although it was the impression of your doctor that
you had sciatic neuropathy, you did not submit the results of the electromyography and nerve
conduction studies which would have confirmed or ruled-out that diagnosis.
As you have not
demonstrated that the diagnosis of somatoform pain disorder is erroneous or unjust, the
Board was unable to recommend any corrective-action in your case. Accordingly, your
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
application has
furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be
taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02043-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. CODE 5294, 10% UNDER CODE 8520, AND 10% UNDER CODE 65 19 FOR A TOTAL RATING OF 34% ROUNDED TO 30% FOR THE DIAGNOSES: USN(RET) WITH ABOUT 5 AND TDRL ON 24 FEBRUARY 1995 ‘/2 YEARS OF (2) STATUS POST LEFT RADIUS FRACTURE WITH...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Tue Oct 03 09_50_55 CDT 2000
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05140-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. It recommended that you be discharged by reason of enlisted in error. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00611
The VA compensation and pension (C&P) examination (mental examination) on 30 September 2008, six months after separation, noted Axis I diagnoses of MDD, panic disorder without agoraphobia, and somatoform disorder. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior separation be recharacterized to reflect that rather than discharge with severance pay, the CI was placed on constructive TDRL at 50% for six months following CI’s medical separation (PTSD at minimum of 50% IAW §4.129 and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03498-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. you were referred to the On 15 July 1999 you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by the personality disorder....
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00188
The informal PEB adjudicated the lumbar spine condition as unfitting, rated 20%, citing criteria of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). While the DES considers all of the service member's medical conditions, compensation can only be offered for those medical conditions that cut short the member’s service career; and the Board’s assessment of fitness determinations is premised on the MOS-specific functional limitations in evidence at the time of separation. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00010
On the VA compensation and pension (C&P) examinations, the CI complained of “horrible, unretractable [ sic ] pain in the left foot.” The pain was constant and worse with any weight-bearing activities, such that he was unable to put any pressure on the foot, walk, or stand. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. In the matter of the mechanical low back pain, anxiety, and depression or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07834-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 January 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 09116-03
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.ou enlisted in the Navy ~n 20 September 1999 at age 20. The Board noted that applicable regulations...