DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No:
20 May 2002
6189-01
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 2 May 2002.
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.
of your counsel.
In addition, the Board considered the comments
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 Navy on 3 May 1993. You underwent a
separation physical examination on 5 May 1998, and were found physically qualified for
separation and to perform the duties of your rank/rate.
1998 by reason of weight control failure. On 19 December
Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability ratings of 10% for asthma, right and left carpal
tunnel syndrome, right and left patellofemoral syndrome, and 0% for right and left hip
strain, for a combined rating of 40%.
You were discharged on 24 July
2oo0, the Department of
pre-
The fact that the VA has awarded you multiple disability ratings does not demonstrate that
your discharge from the Navy was erroneous or unjust.
the VA rated all conditions it classifies as
by or merely traceable to a period of military service, the military departments assign ratings
only in those cases where the service member is unfit to perform the duties of the service
member’s office, grade, rank or rating.
In this regard, it noted that whereas
“service connected”, i.e., incurred in, aggravated
There is no indication in the available records that
you were unfit for duty on 5 May 1998. Accordingly,
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
your application has been denied.
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 | 05506-00
In addition, the VA rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected", without regard to the issue of fitness for military service, and ratings may be raised or lowered throughout a veteran’s life time as the degree of severity of the rated conditions changes. The VA awarded you a 50% rating, while classifying your condition as "mild". 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 | 01691-03
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that on 9 September 1997, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01060-01
A three-niember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2001. 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 | CY2002 | 01631-02
With regard to the member's complaint of limitation of motion in her The member was neck, the medical board focuses on her neck surgery. exam was The member dermatomal distributions, but there's nothing in the claimed that she needed to walk with a cane, The medical board to suggest why she would member also complained of subjective pain in her low back which she said it made her difficult for her to sit for long periods of time. carpal tunnel syndrome with bilateral numbness which has...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10935-07
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of those additional conditions rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08626-98
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. On 2 June 1998, the Record Review Panel of the Physical Evaluation Board found you fit 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00799-02
A medical board was prepared in January 1998 and PEB's Record Review Panel In June, 1998, the forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for consideration. Lumbar Decompression and Low Back Pain Status Post Fusion (72420) The Record Review Panel found the member unfit for duty under VA Code 5295, rated his condition at 10% disability and separation pay. However, Therefore, after careful consideration of all relevant medical evidence, viewed in a .light most favorable to the...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01024
The conditions of history of deep vein thrombosis of the right and left lower extremities with post-phlebetic syndrome and chronic venous insufficiency as requested for consideration are the residuals that, IAW with the VASRD, should be used to rate the unfitting condition of heterozygous factor V Leiden deficiency and therefore they meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview; and are addressed below, as part of the review of the rating for the unfitting condition. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04518-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. (a) which requested comments and a recommendation regarding Petitioner's request for correction of his On 4 June 1993, the Petitioner was discharged and placed on records. placed on the TDRL with a disability rating...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06432-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...