DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No:
5070-00
21 May 2001
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 17 May 2001. Your allegations of error and
injustice 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.
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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 26
August 1965. You were severely wounded in action on 12 August
1966, but you recovered well, and returned to duty after a period
of treatment and convalescence. You performed your duties in a
highly creditable manner thereafter, until the expiration of your
active duty service commitment. You underwent a pre-separation
physical examination on 17 March 1969, and were found physically
qualified for release from active duty. You reported that
prolonged standing caused both ankles to swell and hurt, but that
condition was not considered disqualifying. You were released
from active duty on 3 April 1969. Initially, the Veterans
Administration (VA) awarded you a 20% rating for residuals of the
wounds to your left leg, 0% for the right, and 10% for an ulcer.
Subsequently, it was determined that there was an arteriovenous
fistula in your left leg. The VA rated that condition at 30% by
analogy to an un-repaired fistula, even though the fistual had
been repaired. In addition, the VA assigned a separate rating of
20% for the left leg, increased the rating for the right leg to
20%, and awarded a combined rating of 70%.
The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings
from the VA is not probative of the existence of material error or
injustice in your naval record. In this regard it noted that even though
you suffered from the residuals of your wounds at the time of your release
from active duty, there is no indication in your record that those
residuals rendered you unfit to perform the duties of your office, grade,
rank or rating at the time of your release from active duty, which is a
prerequisite to disability separation or retirement from the Armed Forces.
As noted above, you were considered physically qualified for further
service, and you could have reenlisted had you~wanted to, despite the wound
residuals.
In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04102352C070208
Patrick McGann | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was discharged from the hospital following surgery. He is now rated at 70 percent disabled because of PTSD, for a total disability rating of 100 percent.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00257
The Board also acknowledges the CI’s assertion that his shrapnel injuries are related to his unfitting Stent placement condition and therefore should be subject to additional disability rating; although, the Board must note that a causality linkage of these contended conditions with the unfitting primary condition, even if conceded, is not a basis in itself for separation disability rating. Left Upper Extremity: (Left Subclavian Stent Placement Due to Pseudoaneurysm and Arteriovenous...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05157-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2000. 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. You were wounded in action on 26 December 1968, and awarded the Purple Heart on 5 January 1969.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00194
If the sensory deficit (incomplete paralysis) was considered unfitting and affected an entirely different function form the muscle disability, it would be rated separately from the muscle injury code IAW VASRD §4.55(a). While the sensory deficit and/or paresthesia is documented on multiple Navy exams, there is no evidence it interfered with his ability to perform the duties required of his rank or rating. On 23 April 2010, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01180-07
Specifically, the panel of the Board that considered your case was not persuaded you were issued the silencing order described in your application, that you suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder while serving on active duty in the Navy, or that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability prior to your separation from the Navy. Two other survivors of the Liberty attack have applied for correction of their naval...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00131
The Board considered the PEB rating which reflects the left saphenous nerve injury. Service Treatment Record. Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00018
The PEB adjudicated the left Achilles tendon condition and the right anterior tibialis tendon condition as unfitting, rated each at 10%, with application of SECNAVINST 1850.4E, DoDI 1332.39 and Veteran’s Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD), respectively. The VA rating decision was 0% for scars which are not considered disabling because of limitation of function of the affected part (coded 7805). In the matter of the right tibialis anterior tendon condition and IAW VASRD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012532
That is why the VA can rate the applicant for having medical conditions even though those same conditions did not make him unfit to perform his military duties. The PEB found the applicant to be unfit under VASRD code 8626 due to chronic neuritis in his left leg, including wounds to the left proximal medial thigh, and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating. If he should ask the VA to rate him for PTSD, and if he received even just a 10 percent...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09081-07
’ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. The Board concluded that your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions effective the day following your release from active duty is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00639
SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active dutySGT/E-5 (75H/Personnel Services Specialist)medically separated for bilateral knee pain, left testicular pain and a congenital hypospadiascondition causing urinary leakage that was surgically repaired twice, non-compensable, existed prior to service (EPTS) without service aggravation.The CI first experienced bilateral knee pain and testicular pain in 1997. After...