Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00213-01
Original file (00213-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 213-01
23 October 2001

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 12 October 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 underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 15 June 1999.
“murmer” [sic] at age 18 months.
The only significant medical history you disclosed was a 
You advised the examining physician that your mother had told you that you had a heart
murmur when you were an infant, but “not lately”. You concealed your history of a cleft
mitral valve and mitral insufficiency, which are disqualifying for military service;
consequently, you were found physically qualified for enlistment. On or about 23 August
(VSD),
1999, a-civilian physician determined that you might have a ventricular septal defect 
and he recommended further testing with more sensitive equipment. Testing conducted on
27 June 2000 disclosed the presence of a thickened and redundant mitral valve leaflet and
redundant 
membranous VSD. You did not disclose this new information when your Navy physical
examination was updated on 8 June 2000. You enlisted in the Navy on that date, and served
until 19 July 2000, when you were discharged for failing to meet medical/physical
procurement fitness standards because of the aforementioned heart defects. Discharge
processing was prompted by your complaints of chest pain, and disclosure that a civilian

chordae, cleft anterior leaflet with moderate mitral regurgitation, and a 

peri-

physician had advised you to avoid vigorous exercise because of your heart conditions. Tests
conducted by a Navy cardiologist essentially confirmed the findings made on 27 June 2000,
as described above.

Based on the foregoing, it was clear to the Board that you are not physically qualified for
military service. As you have not demonstrated that your discharge was erroneous or unjust,
the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Accordingly, 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 
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.

offic

ial

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director



Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00422

    Original file (PD2012-00422.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the s/p mitral ring repair with post-operative atrial fibrillation on chronic anticoagulation and anti- arrhythmic therapy as unfitting and rated it 0%, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). (2) is limited to those conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service; or, when requested by the CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.”...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803224

    Original file (9803224.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Effective Apr 95, the applicant received a 30% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for his “aortic insufficiency/stenosis with mitral valve prolapse.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and indicated that as early as 1986, the applicant was diagnosed with valvular heart disease, most likely secondary to rheumatic fever, the disease affecting the aortic as...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07637-10

    Original file (07637-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. You were released from active duty on 11 March 1994. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material #verror or injustice.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00979

    Original file (PD2010-00979.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    BAV and chest pain (exertion related) were the only conditions on the MEB’s submission to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated with a 10% disability rating. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review Mr. XXXX’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either his characterization of separation or in...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00769

    Original file (PD-2014-00769.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Generalized Anxiety D/O940010%Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood944010%20080515Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy with Mitral Regurgitation7020----Hypertrophic Subaortic Stenosis with Mitral...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501131

    Original file (ND0501131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that her characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. This condition is not correctable to meet naval standards.000616: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by mitral valve prolapse and migraine headaches.000616: Applicant...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00863

    Original file (PD2010-00863.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    I then went before the formal board and received 10% with a disability code of 7121 which allows up to 30% disability rating which would have allowed me to retire.” In block 14 of the DD Form 294 he notes: “The following is the VA decision on disability: I was rated at 60% disabled with the following determinations: Right Kidney Cortical Atrophy with Compensatory Left Kidney Hypertrophy with Residual Thinning & Scarring, Aortic Valve Insufficiency with Regurgitation, Mitral Valve...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500748

    Original file (ND0500748.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Applicant contends that he did not fraudulently enter the military service because he did not have a diagnosed disqualifying anxiety disorder prior to the Navy.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101068C070208

    Original file (2004101068C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that she be placed on active duty medical evaluation (ADME) and that her military medical records be corrected to reflect the injuries, illnesses, and diseases that were not diagnosed during her active service. The applicant provides her service medical records; an application for ADME; a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision; a VA magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) report; line of duty investigation reports; her DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00595

    Original file (PD-2012-00595.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Cardiac Condition. The PEB and VA rated the cardiac condition under different codes which have the same rating criteria IAW §4.104. The PEB rated the cardiac condition 10%, 7000 valvular heart disease, citing requirement for continuous medication (Coumadin).