DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 6771-01
9 July 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 6 June 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.
opinion furnished by the Neurology Specialty Leader, Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth,
Virginia, dated 22 January 2002, a copy of which is attached, and the information submitted
by your parents and your counsel in response thereto.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
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.
physical disability which was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of service.
It was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty because of a
The Board noted that your enlistment was fraudulent, in that you failed to disclose significant
You
aspects of your medical history which would have disqualified your from enlisting.
concealed your past history of paroxysmal dystonia, which you first developed at age 3 or 4,
and was thought to be secondary to birth hypoxia.
had required braces to walk, and that your exercise tolerance had decreased over the years
preceding your enlistment. The fact that you were found physically qualified for enlistment is
of little significance, because your fraud prevented medical personnel from accurately
assessing your fitness for military service.
It is notable, however, that based on observation
alone, the physician who conducted your pre-enlistment physical examination was concerned
about your
neurologic and orthopedic fitness for enlistment, and recommended specialist
In addition, you did not disclose that you
consultations. The results of those consultations were not available to the Board. In addition,
the Board noted that your signature on enlistment documents appears to indicate that you had
a significant tremor in your major arm which adversely affected your ability to write legibly.
the Board noted
With regard to the issue of the relationship between your dystonia and the prophylactic
medication you were prescribed because of a positive tuberculin skin test,
that the standard of care for young, well nourished, non-alcoholic, otherwise healthy
individuals, such as military recruits, does not mandate that persons taking INH also be
prescribed vitamin B-6. Although it is possible that you would have been prescribed vitamin
B-6 had you disclosed your history of neurological disorders, or perhaps even been prescribed
another prophylactic medication, your failure to disclose pertinent medical history precluded
informed decisions concerning appropriate medical care. The Board concluded that the
adverse health effects associated with your taking INH, if any, are attributable to your own
misconduct. The Board noted, however, that the evidence submitted in support of your
application concerning the effects of INH on your neurological status is equivocal. For
example, Dr.
contributing to your symptoms. The statement of Drs. Feiler and Bey of 11 July 2001,
indicates that differential explanations for the onset of your symptoms were INH induced,
versus systemic disorders or overexertion unmasking your underlying hereditary abnormality.
McClean’s report, dated 16 July 2001, indicates that the INH probably was not
The Board noted that although your twin brother ’s neurological disorder was not symptomatic
to the same extent that yours was when you arrived home following your discharge, he was
discharged, as your father states, at the same time and
“under similar circumstances ”, i.e.,
because of a preexisting condition or defect which was below minimum physical standards for
enlistment. It is interesting to note that at age 10, he developed symptoms very similar to
those you had following your discharge from the Navy, namely slurred speech and
progressive weakness to the point that he had almost no muscle function. There is no
indication that he took INH before the onset of those symptoms.
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
Enclosure
M.D.
CDR MC
USN(FS)
Neurology Specialty Leader
Naval Medical Center
Portsmouth Virginia 23708
(757) 953-2152
22 JAN 02
To:
Chairman, Board for Corrections of Naval Records
0 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ICO:
Encl: (a) BCNR File
(b) Service Record
1.
2.
3.
Enclosures (a) and (b) were thoroughly reviewed. This review relates to the SNM
service-
contesting that his USN discharge should be changed to
related disability ” Ii-om a general discharge.
“medical, with a
The nature of the patient ’s condition and the past medical history clearly delineate
that would have been present prior to the
in his letter dated 1 AUG 01 relates that the
SNM ’s entry
SNM suffers
from a “rnitochondrial disorder ”. Though he is not specific as to the exact type of
disorder, the history and exam would be consistent with a condition in this general
grouping.
My recommendation is that the
(“general ”), and that there is no evidence of service-related medical disability
would warrant a change of classification.
SNM ’s discharge should remain classified as it is
that
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01944
SEPARATION DATE: 20050701 Treatment with Myobloc seemed ineffective.On examination, the CI had severe cervical dystonia with laterocollis and frequent head turning to the right with flexion of the neck and some secondary movement of the arms. In the matter of the cervical dystonia condition, the Board unanimously recommends adisability rating of 30%, coded 8103 IAW VASRD §4.124a.There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00491
The Informal PEB determined she was unfit for continued Naval service and she was then separated with a 10% disability for Dystonia using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Service and Department of Defense regulations. Because my playing problem was NOT diagnosed correctly (musician's dystonia), I continued to blame myself for my inability to play the flute. The Navy PEB that determined the CI was unfit secondary to dystonia, did not address the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01732-02
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, and the record of the two previous reviews of your application by the Board. In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which is attached. An SNMHAS record entry dated 12 August 1987 indicates...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00520
The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the post-concussive syndrome and cervical dystonia condition as unfitting, rated 10%, respectively with application of the DoDI 1332.39 and Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). According to the examiner, other than PTSD, there were no other mental symptoms. During the NP testing and psychiatry evaluation, the CI indicated that these symptoms were not functionally impairing and the CI did not seek or receive treatment for PTSD.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00682
Migraine headaches Condition . The Board also noted that from January to June 2007, the CI was seen 9 times for conditions not related to either the migraine headaches or mental health conditions and was placed on 24 hours quarters twice. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows and that the discharge with severance pay be recharacterized to reflect permanent disability retirement, effective as of the date of hisprior medical separation:
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2001-114
Prior to enrolling in DEP, during recruit processing at MEPS, the applicant indicated no problems with her neck or neck muscles on pre-enlistment physical examination reports. of the Medical Manual, the Coast Guard was required to determine the applicant’s fitness for duty when the applicant’s health problems associated with her neck interfered with her duties aboard her second cutter. Moreover, the Coast Guard has recommended that the Board grant partial relief by ordering the Coast Guard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01603
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEWNAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE: PD1201603BRANCH OF SERVICE: AIR FORCEBOARD DATE: 20131016 Contended PEB Conditions .The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that contended back pain,cold induced urticaria and hypertension conditions were not unfitting. In the matter of the contended back pain, cold induced uticariaand hypertension conditions the Board unanimously recommends no change from the PEB...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501166
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached document/letter: “After failing to getting any help from the Navy and feeling more suicidal and depressed, I left to come home. 050222: COMCARSTRKGRU TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.050223: Evaluation report documents the Applicant’s “second consecutive Physical Fitness Test and was awarded Captain’s Mast for and Unauthorized Absence period of 29 days. The...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600189
ND06-00189 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051107. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Treatment Plan: 8 months LIMDU away for stressor, Depakote for treatment of impulse control/lability, Individual psychotheraphy @ Fleet and Family services, NMCP outpatient crisis intervention program Limitations: Shore duty only – no weekends, nights, or rotating shifts.