DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 6432-01
10 May 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 25 April 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.
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 spinal condition was evaluated and
The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 17 July 1995. You had spinal
surgery during May 1999 because of a herniated nuclues propulsus. On 6 July 1999, you
underwent a pre-separation physical examination.
not considered disqualifying. As you apparenlty did not want to reenlist in the Marine
Corps, you were instructed to seek orthopedic follow-up with the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA). You were considered physically qualified for separation on that date, and you
were released from active duty on 16 July 1999.
RE-Rl, to indicate that you were fully qualified and recommended for reenlistment. You
were evaluated by a VA contract physician on 19 July 1999. He noted that you had
subjective symptoms of back pain, but found no signs of radiculopathy, which would be
indicative of recurrent disc disease, or significant limitation of motion. Notwithstanding
those findings, the VA awarded you a 60% rating under VA cod 5293, effective from 17
July 1999, for pronounced intervertebral disc disease, which is the highest permitted rating
for that condition.
You were assigned a reenlistment code of
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty at the time of your release from
active duty. The fact that the VA awarded you a substantial disability rating is not probative
of error or injustice, because the VA assigns ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for
duty. In addition, it appears that the rating you were assigned was based on your subjective
complaints, rather than objective findings.
Had you been found unfit for military duty, it
does not appear that the objective
excess of 10%. As you may know, a 30% rating is required for disability retirement.
fidings in your case would have supported a rating in
In view of the foregoing, 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04558-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2003. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05132-00
The member had a board of flight surgeons in disability from the VA for a "spinal disc but the member complained of It must be noted The member appealed that The member has been The member testified that all his fitness reports were in the top 1% until he stopped drilling in March 1997. that his cessation of drilling status was secondary to his neck surgery. during which time the member was not on active duty in This is consistent with the member's having been there was no opportunity for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04372-02
your back condition to Navy or Marine Corps officials after you underwent spinal disc surgery in 1990. The Board noted that although you suffered acute exacerbations of your back condition during periods of military duty in 1997 and 1999, you did not sustain any significant trauma to your spine during those , and there was permanent aggravation of the preexisting periods, you were not “injured” The exacerbations of your condition, one condition during those periods of military duty. VASRD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02436-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2003. Although you had symptoms of spinal pathology prior to your release from it does not appear that you were unfit for duty at active duty, that time. 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 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit 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.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02528
The back condition, characterized as “persistent L5 radiculopathy”, was the forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E.The Informal PEB adjudicated “persistent L5 radiculopathy failing surgical decompression”as unfitting, rated at0%,with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101870C070208
Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph B-39a states that, for VASRD codes 5293 (intervertebral disc syndrome) and 5295 (lumbosacral strain), a 40 or 60 percent disability rating will be predicated upon objective medical findings of neurological involvement. DoDI 1332.39, paragraph E2.A1.1.20.1 (VASRD code 5295) states that a zero percent rating shall be awarded for chronic low back pain of unknown etiology. Given that the applicant's main complaint was that he continued to have mainly...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10018-02
10018-02 3 October 2003 From: To : Sub j : Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy - FORMER ma-- 315-02-0216; REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show that he was restored to active duty to undergo surgical procedures on his spinal column, or, in the alternative, that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06501-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. Effective 23 March 1994, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability ratings of 20% for the spinal disc eondition, 10% fer CTS of each wrist, 50% for a total hysterectomy with removal of ovaries and fallopian tubes, and 0% for two other conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01637
The InformalPEBadjudicated “C4-5 herniated nucleus pulposus and C6-C7 bulge with early myelopathy, status post foraminotomy, Aug 2000,” as unfitting, rated at 10%,with application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI non-concurred with the IPEB findings/recommendations, and requested Formal PEB (FPEB), who re-adjudicated the CI’s neck condition increasing the rating from 10% to 20%.The CI non-concurred with the FPEB findings/recommendations further appealed to the Air...