DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 5535-01
28 December 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 13 December 2001. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Specialty Advisor for Pulmonary Medicine
dated 6 September 2001, a copy of which is attached.
Documentary material considered by the Board
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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the advisory opinion. 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 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
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NATIONAL NAVAL MEDICAL CENTE
BETHESDA, MARYLAND
20889-5600
R
14
REP!
*
REFER
Tn
September 6, 2001
From: CAP
To:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
2 Navy Annex
Washington DC 20370-5 100
USN, Specialty Advisor for Pulmonary Medicine
Subj: COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF
Ref
(a) Letter dated 09 August 2001, Docket No.
0553501
Encl: (1) BCNR File
(2) Service Record
ce (a) the Service Record and BCNR File of EX-USN,
were reviewed in regard to the question of a diagnosis
patient’s medical record indicates that he had a history of asthma with asthma attacks until
age 12-14 years old. He was hospitalized at age 12 and admitted to a 1 O-day period of
respiratory distress at a time of the evaluation on 4 September 1997. The evaluation in the
clinic demonstrated moderate respiratory distress with stridorous breath sounds and diffuse
crackles on exam. Peak flows were essentially normal and patient was treated with inhaled
albuterol, with apparent improvement in symptoms, Pulmonary function studies appear to
have been ordered, however these are not included in the material forwarded to me for
review. The information provided in the physical examination and medical record is not
sufficient to conclusively establish the diagnosis of asthma in this patient, however it does
appear that the patient did have a significant history of childhood asthma, which was not
disclosed in his initial entry into the United States Navy. Review of his admission, history
and physical does not mention any history of asthma, wheezing or other significant medical
history, including hospitalization. This information was apparently hidden from the person
providing his initial intake physical.
2. The information provided by the Ex-USN Recruit
-from his physician is not
sufficient to establish or eliminate the possibility of a diagnosis of asthma. The pulmonary
function tests provided are normal without significant improvement with bronchodialator
therapy. This is not particularly helpful in excluding asthma since many patients with
significant asthma can have essentially normal lung function and symptoms between attacks.
A test that attempted to provoke an asthma attack, such as a methacoline or histamine
challenge test, would be much more useful in determining if the patient really has asthma.
3.
After reviewing the medical record it is not entirely clear that the patient has a diagnosis of
asthma, however it does appear that the patient did have a history of childhood asthma which
was not disclosed and which would likely have precluded his enlistment in the United States
Navy. The presence of symptoms to age 14 and the hospitalization indicate that his asthma
was clinically significant and therefore likely to recur during adulthood. I would recommend
that the diagnosis of asthma not be changed at this time since there is insufficient evidence to
over rule the impression of the treating physicians, and the history in the medical record is
strongly suggestive of asthma. If the patient were to provide
form of a histamine or methacoline challenge test which indicated the absence of airway
hyperreactivity then the diagnosis of asthma should be reconsidered.
further documentation in the
4.
If additional information or action is required I can be reached at (3 10) 295-4217.
CAPT, MC, USN
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01096
The MEB referred him to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, states the Air Force medical standards regarding asthma are very strict, and even mild asthma is a disqualifying condition for continued service, even if it does not directly interfere with the individuals work performance. ROBERT S. BOYD Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2002-01096 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001909C070206
She was diagnosed with bronchitis and given some medication. The applicant's service medical records are not available. The evidence (the EPSBD proceedings) she provided does not state she completed a methacoline challenge test.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00721
The PEB adjudicated the asthma condition as unfitting, rated 30%; with application of Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and the CI was placed on Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) at 30%. Although originally prescribed a daily use inhaled maintenance/preventive medication, the CI elected to discontinue the medication and at final separation there was no indication that a daily-use inhalation preventive medication was used or prescribed. The NARSUM...
The Board consequently found the member unfit for military service for his condition of asthma and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of physical disability, with entitlement to severance pay after being diagnosed with asthma. We took note of the applicant’s requests that his records be corrected to show that he was not discharged by reason of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02663
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2002-02663 INDEX CODE 100.06 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Separation Program Designator (SPD) (narrative reason) and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes for his 1999 entry-level separation be changed so he can reenlist. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01574
The PEB did not address the second MEB condition of “ other acute and subacute respiratory conditions due to fumes and vapors.” The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The MEB NARSUM dated 1 September 2004, recorded at the time of the MEB; the CI used only the “rescue” (quick acting to terminate SOB or prevent SOB) inhaler on as needed basis. The Board noted the NARSUM documented only intermittent use of a rescue bronchodilator inhaler.
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01089
Additionally, speech pathology commented that “stress related to adjustment to military life and depression related to being away from his family…appear to be significant contributing factors.” Psychiatry recommended concomitant treatment with SSRIs for management of the related depression and anxiety symptoms, with occasional short term use of benzodiazepines for acute exacerbations of his vocal cord dysfunction. The Board considered all of the evidence, and concluded that the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04726-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting session, considered your application on 5 September 2002. 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. In my opinion, the patient likely has mild asthma.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02522
The rating for the unfitting asthma condition is addressed below. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bronchial Asthma6699-660210%Asthma6602100%20070531Other x 1 (Not in Scope)Other x 5 Combined: 10%Combined: 100% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060801 (most proximate to date of separation (DOS)) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :The Board also acknowledges the CI’s contention that suggests a higher service rating should have been granted on the unfitting medical...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00005
Asthma Condition . Finally, while the Board did not have the childhood records in evidence for review, the Board concluded that both the PEB and FPEB documented childhood asthma after reviewing these records and represented this evidence accurately. 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.