DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON. D.C. 203704100
Docket No:
8 January 2001
4503-00
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:
Secretary of the Navy
Subj: F O
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Refi
Encl:
(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) DD Form 149
(2) Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner,
filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that naval record be corrected to
show, in effect, that he was assigned a more favorable reenlistment, which would permit him
to reenlist without waiver consideration.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Chapman, Mcculloch and Zsalman, reviewed
Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 4 January 2001 and, pursuant to its
regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the
enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations
of error and injustice finds as follows:’
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies
available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 24 March 1998. According to a medical
record entry dated 30 March 1998, he was noted to have decreased breath sounds in the left
lung. A chest x-ray disclosed evidence of residual left sided infiltrates, which was assessed
as slowly resolving pneumonia. A 2 April 1998 medical record entry indicates that he
continued to have functional problems secondary to residual pneumonia. Physical
examination disclosed decreased air flow on the left with coarse rhonchi through the left lung
field, a pleural rub on the left, and a “catch” on deep inspiration. On 2 April 1998, a
physician noted that Petitioner had complained of shortness of breath, and he classified
Petitioner’s condition under IDC-9 code 486.00, which corresponds to a diagnosis of
pneumonia; however, he wrote out the diagnosis
as’“Persistent QLL collapse [with]
scarring [post] QLL Pneumonia”.
It appears that he inadvertently used the word “collapse”
fur the word “infiltrates”, as Petitioner was not referred for treatment of a collapsed lung at
that time, and persistent lung infiltrates had been found previously. On 10 April 1998,
Petitioner was advised of his rights in connection with a proposed discharge by reasonof
erroneous enlistment. He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf, and did not
object to the proposed separation action. On 15 April 1998, he was discharged by reason of
& Induction-Erroneous PRE EXISTING LEFT LUNG COLLAPSE
“Defective Enlistment
RE-3F, to indicate
(without admin discharge board)
that he did not complete initial entry level training.
“, and assigned a reenlistment code of
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice in connection with Petitioner ’s discharge by reason of erroneous enlistment, or the
assignment of an RE-3F reenlistment code.
diagnosis applied to Petitioner ’s condition, he did not meet the minimum physical standards
for enlistment because he had reduced exercise capacity and shortness of breath, as well as
persistent lung infiltrates, residual to a persistent lung condition which required medical
observation and treatment for an extended period shortly before he entered on active duty.
In this regard, it noted that regardless of the
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board notes that Petitioner did not have a collapsed lung;
accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to delete the words “collapsed lung ” from
his DD form 214.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected by the expunction of the words “PRE
EXISTING LEFT LUNG COLLAPSE ” from the DD form 214 he was issued for the period
24 March-15 April 1998, and that the words
.
b. That the remainder of his request for correction of his record be denied.
c. That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner ’s naval record.
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was
present at the Board ’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete
record of the Board ’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
”
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
/Acting Recorder
the
Board for correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures
of
723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the
foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by
the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00774
The PEB adjudicated the chronic left lung condition as unfitting, rated 10%, five years after being placed on TDRL, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The exams documented improving weight, negative serology titers for coccidiomycosis yet continued symptoms of dyspnea on exertion (DOE), chest pain and headaches. At the final TDRL MEB exam, the CI reported no improvement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011335
The applicant was honorably discharged from active duty on 25 August 2010 pursuant to Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-17, based on "other designated physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability," adjustment disorder. In this case the plaintiff had a temporary profile of "4" at the time of his discharge and he was discharged without a separation physical or medical board. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00460
She was then medically separated with a 10% disability rating for SVC syndrome secondary to fibrosing mediastinitis. RATING COMPARISON: Service FPEB Dated 20030729 VA * All Effective Date 20030924 Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam SVC Syndrome, Secondary to Fibrosing Mediastinitis 7199-7120 10% Fibrosing Mediastinitis with DVT and S/P stenting of SVC and R/Main PA 6899-6817 60% *STR Combined: 10% Combined: 60% *No C&P Exams in Record ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board noted that...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00654
The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), found unfit for continued Naval service, and separated at 20% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Navy and Department of Defense regulations. The Board also considered the conditions of Right Wrist Scar and Bronchiectasis and unanimously determined that neither condition was unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07243-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMS Docket No: 7243-08 27 March 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. On 22 April 1985, he received a medical evaluation that noted his medical history and he stated that he was not in good health and got sick when working. On 18 July 1985, he was so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07584-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2001. 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. You denied a history of asthma and shortness of breath, but disclosed that you had been treated for pneumonia.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 02351
SEPARATION DATE: 20060629 The CI is also eligible for PDBR review of other conditions evaluated by the PEB and has elected review by the PDBR.The ratings for the unfitting asthma and anxiety conditions are addressed below and no other conditions meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the original...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00419
The Board carefully considered the frequency and nature of the CI’s headaches including objective evidence and corroborating subjective evidence.For TDRL entry rating, both the Service and VA ratings were 30% using the criteria from disability code 8100. The CI was using a Proventil inhaler and had normal lung radiographs.At the VA C&P exam, approximately 3 months after TDRL entry, the CI claimed heart murmur, dyspnea, pulmonary edema and bronchitis was not comprehensively evaluated as the...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00494
MCTD can affect multiple organ systems and the CI manifested fatigue, sclerodermatous skin changes of the face, forearms, and hands, Raynaud’s phenomenon, muscle fatigue with use, difficulty swallowing due to esophageal dysmotility with gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal stricture, and shortness of breath on exertion that was initially thought to be due to interstitial lung disease, a manifestation affecting some patients with MCTD. There are VASRD rating criteria for several of the...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01990
Physical examination of the chest was normal with good air movement.The examiner stated the CI had continued to report left-sided chest wall pain, SOB,and had continued to refuse to work with pressurized aircraft. The VARD noted the service treatment records did not indicate that there had been any residual lung condition associated with the CI’s symptoms and the VA physical examination that included chest X-rays, found no lung abnormalities; however, noted the CI had not cooperated with...