DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY

BOARD FORCORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No: 6427-98
15 January 2002

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 10 January 2002. 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 opinions furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel
Boards (NCPB) dated 26 September 2000 and 14 August 2001, the Specialty Leader for
Tropical Medicine, dated 19 April 2001, and the Rheumatology Service Chief, National
Naval Medicine Center, dated 15 July 2001. A copy of each opinion 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. It was not persuaded that you suffered from Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever
or any related condition or disability. In this regard, it substantially concurred with the
comments contained in the 14 August 2001 opinion of the Director, NCPB, and opinion
provided by the Specialty Leader for Tropical Medicine.
with the determination of the Director, NCPB, that your disability at the time of your
permanent retirement is more accurately reflected by the rating recommended by the Director
in the 14 August 2001 opinion, correcting your record in accordance with his
recommendation would not accord you any effective relief, because your combined rating
70%, and it would have no effect on your Department of Veterans Affairs
would remain at  
disability rating. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

In addition, although it concurred

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

Enclosure

19 Apr 01

MEMORANDUM

From: Specialty Leader for Tropical Medicine, US Navy
To:

Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records, 2 Navy Annex, Washington,
D.C. 20370-5 100

Subj:

THE CASE OF

Ref:

(a) Yr ltr JRE:jdh Docket No: 6427-98 Dated 12 

Dee 00

1. Based on the provided medical documents in reference (a), the available medical
literature, review of laboratory data books from the Navy Forward Laboratory deployed
during the Persian Gulf conflict, and discussions with the physicians that provided
healthcare for LT Mosborg and the laboratory personnel that performed her deployed
CCHF assays during her acute illness, I conclude that the probability that she was ever
infected with Congo-Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever was less that 10%. Furthermore,
CCI-IF may have a convalescence of several weeks, but not years.
patients that survive 
There have been no reported long-term or permanent sequelae of CCHF that are similar
to LT Mosborg ’s extensive medical problems.

. “. 

Congo-

’s memory. Walter Reed

NM or Walter Reed wanted to perform this assay on one of their

. apparently had a positive 
2. With respect to the 6 February 1997 reference to 
Crimean and hemorrhagic fever serology done at Walter Reed and at the National
Institute (sic) Health. “, I personally spoke to senior laboratory directors at both
institutions. NIH has never done this assay to the best of anyone
Medical Center medical laboratory has never had the capability to perform this laboratory
assay. If either the 
patients they would send a blood sample to the US Army Medical Research Institute for
Infectious Disease (USAMRIID) in Fort  
Detrick, MD where the assay is regularly
one-
performed. USAMRIID does not retain a record by patient name, however from a
year period of time before and until a one-year period of time after the stated time of the
assay in question USAMRIID had NO positive CCHF results. Therefore, if the patient
had the blood sample drawn, the only place it would have been sent is USAMRIID, and
that laboratory had NO positive tests during that time. The findings in paragraph 1 and 2
are consistent with the NEGATIVE test results reported by the Centers of Disease
Control.

 

3. Based on the provided medical documents, consultation with a rheumatologist and
discussions with the physicians that provided healthcat-e for LT Mosborg during her acute
illness, I conclude that the probability that she had hypersensitivity vasculitis is
approximately 70%. Hypersensitivity vasculitis is most often a self-limited disease that
occurs once; occasionally mild forms of the disease recur once or twice during the next
few months. Hypersensitivity vasculitis is not a chronic disease and has not been
reported to cause any of the multiple medical conditions suffered by LT Mosborg.

Subj:

THE CASE OF

4. Based on the provided medical documents, I concur that
should be provided as much support as is appropriate for he
conditions. However, as the N
Medicine, it is my opinion that
Hemorrhagic Fever during her Persian Gulf military assignment. Furthermore, as CCHF
has never been reported to cause any of the current chronic disease maladies reported in
mrecord, none of her current medical conditions relate to CCHF.

eral’s Specialty Leader for Tropical
not suffer from Congo-Crimean

s disabled and
medical

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL COUNCIL

  OF PERSONNEL BOARDS

720 

KENNON STREET SE STE 309

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20374-5023

5220
Ser: 01-23
14AugOl

THE CASE

/

From: Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards
To:

Executive Director, Board for Corrections of Naval Records

Subj 

:

Ref

Encl.

(a) Your ltr JRE:jdh Docket No: 06427-98 of 1 Jun 01
(b) SECNAVINST 

1850.4D

(1) My ltr 5800 PEB of 9 Jul 01
(2) Service Chief, Rheumatology NNMC ltr of 15 Jul 01

1. This letter responds to Petitioner’s request for correction of her naval records as found
in reference (a). The Petitioner contends she was entitled to additional disability ratings
at the time of her retirement from the naval service in 1996. As part of the review of the
Petitioner’s case a request was made for an advisory opinion from the Service Chief of
the Rhuematology Department at the National Naval Medical Center (Enclosure (1)).

2. The Petitioner’s case history, contained in reference (a), was thoroughly reviewed in
accordance with reference (b) and is returned. The following comments are provided:

a. The Petitioner identifies a number of conditions she believes should have been
rated. Virtually none of the conditions identified by the Petitioner since she was placed
on the TDRL in December 1991 appear to have been either separately unfitting or
contributing significantly to her unfitness relative to her active duty service in the U.S.
Navy. The Petitioner was able to function as a nurse on a part-time basis until sometime
in 1995. Also, it should be noted that on 26 February 1997, the Petitioner accepted the
PEB findings of 24 February 1997 and waived her right to a formal hearing.

b. The precise characterization of the Petitioner’s original illness remains

unknown, but all of the symptoms were noted at the time of her original referral to the
PEB on 23 July 1991. It is reasonable to resolve any doubt with respect to the original
diagnosis and its relationship to her subsequent diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
in the Petitioner’s favor based upon the advisory opinion provided in enclosure (2). There
is no record of a positive test for Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever.

c. The manifestations of depression have been variable and can be tied to the

severity of her other conditions.

Subj 

:

I N THE CASE

d. The following correction of her record is recommended to accurately account

for the Petitioner ’s condition:

CATEGORY I: Unfitting conditions:
1. Residual Brachial Neuritis with

Myofascial Pain Syndrome
Left Shoulder (7234)

2. Major Depression Single Episode (2962)
3 Hypersensitivity Vasculitis (4476) with

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 7 199-6354
5299i5003

4. Degenerative Arthritis

Left 

 

Patellofemoral Joint Surgically Treated (7 159)

8513
5099-502 1

9209

20
10 vice 30

10 vice 30

40
10

65=70°~PDlU/70%

CATEGORY II: Conditions that contribute to the unfitting condition:

5. Chorodal Retinal Scar, Right Eye (36330) Related to DX 

#3

In summary, a correction the Petitioner

3.
her condition, but this change will not have any affect on her overall disability rating of
70%.

’s record is recommended to properly reflect

2

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL COUNCIL OF PERSONNEL BOARDS

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
720 
KENNON STREET SE RM 309
WASHINGTON. DC 20374-5023

542 0
Ser:
00-1 6
26  Sep  200 0

From:
To:

Subj:

Ref:

Director,
Executive Director,

Naval Council of Personnel Boards

Board for Correction of Naval Records

(a) Chairman,
(b)  SECNAVINST  

BCNR JRE:jdh DN: 6427-98 ltr of 14 Jun 2000

1850.4D

SE OF

This responds to reference (a) which requested comments and a

1.
recommendation regarding petitioner's request for correction of her records
to show that she was entitled to additional disability ratings at the time of
her retirement from the naval service in 1996.

The petitioner's case history, contained in reference (a), was thoroughly

2.
reviewed in accordance with reference 
comments and recommendations are provided.

(b)  and is returned.

The following

a.

Those conditions rated by the VA that were manifest while petitioner

was on active duty do not appear to have been unfitting at the time she was
placed on the TDRL despite the presence of related symptoms.
is also compatible with the fact that the issue of separate unfitness for
these conditions does not appear to have been raised by either petitioner or
her health care providers during the PEB review process.

This conclusion

b.

It is possible that at the time of petitioner's placement on the

PDRL  (with petitioner's consent), that,
determination,
overlooked by the PEB.

This includes:

a number of petitioner's conditions were either over-rated or

by roughly concurrent nominal VA

(1)  Major Depression,
(30% PEB, 10% VA)

Single Episode (9209)

(2) Residual Brachial Neuritis with Myofascial Pain

Syndrome,
(50% PEB, 20% VA)

Left Shoulder,

(5025,8513)

The following conditions appear to have been unfitting at the time petitioner
was placed on the TDRL but might have been overlooked by the PEB at the time
of placement on the PDRL.

(1) Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (60% VA)
(2) Leptomeningeal Cyst,

Status Post Aspiration

And placement of Ventricular Peritoneal Shunt
(10% VA)
(3) Cystitis,

Bladder Spasm, Incontinence, Nocturia (20% VA)

In view of the above,

C .
before this office can provide a meaningful and informed recommendation:

the following information/review must be obtained

Subj:

REQUEST

FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF

(1) Copy of petitioner's report of positive serology for

Congo-Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever from Walter Reed Army Medical Center/National
Institute of Health.

(2) 

BUMED  Tropical Medicine Specialty Leader review of BCNR

request including comment on the likelihood that any or all of petitioner's
continuing symptoms and diagnosed conditions (the 
chronicity/clinical
courses) represent the consequences of petitioner's Congo-Crimean Hemorrhagic
Fever and/or Hypersensitivity Vasculitis.
then what is the etiology of petitioner's clinical presentation?

If not these clinical entities,

In summary,

3.
recommendation concerning petitioner's request.
provided, however,
in 

2.c.(l)&(2)

following receipt and review

 above.

the evidence in this record is insufficient to support a

A recommendation will be

rmation requested