Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08109-01
Original file (08109-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
FOR  CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

BOARD  

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 8 109-01
20 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 9 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.

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 noted that although you sustained a tear of your left anterior rotator cuff in March
1967, it was healed as of 26 March 1968, when you were found fit for release from active
duty. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs awarded you a disability rating for
residuals of the rotator cuff tear does not establish that your release from active duty was
erroneous, because that agency awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness
for military service. As you were not unfit for duty in 1968, you were not entitled to Navy
disability benefits. Accordingly, 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09901-08

    Original file (09901-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00262

    Original file (PD2011-00262.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of the MEB exam, range-of-motion (ROM) was limited and painful. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05906-97

    Original file (05906-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 May 1999. 901 M STREET SE WASHINGTON, DC 20374-5023 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 Ser: 23 Mar 99 99-029 Director, Chairman, Naval Council of Personnel Boards Board for Correction of Naval Records COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER (a) BCNR ltr JRE DN: (b) SECNAVINST (c) CMDR 1850.4C gist, dated 7 Apr 98 5906-97 dated 30 Jun...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00719

    Original file (PD2010-00719.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His treatment included medications, physical therapy, subacromial and nerve root injections, and three arthroscopic surgeries, without significant improvement. The PEB rated the shoulder condition as a muscle injury IAW §4.73, while the VA used §4.71a to rate the condition for impairment of the clavicle or scapula. These conditions likely contributed to the CI’s overall shoulder impairment, however, and are considered in the Board’s recommendations.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00407

    Original file (PD2012-00407.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Left Knee Condition. Left Shoulder Condition. In the matter of the left shoulder rotator cuff tear condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 10%, coded 5299-5201 IAW VASRD §4.71a.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009198

    Original file (20110009198.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's service records, including his personnel and medical records are not available for review with this case. He stated: * His shoulder injury occurred while on active duty and he underwent an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) in March 1997 wherein the doctors noted his rotator cuff problems * Although there was no line of duty completed, the treatment and the diagnosis should have been sufficient to refer him to the PDES * His chain of command failed to complete the line of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00193

    Original file (PD2009-00193.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Condition 2: Left Shoulder Using an evaluation completed four months after the time of separation from Service, the Veterans Administration (VA) rated this disability as 5201-5019 Left Shoulder Partial Rotator Cuff Tear and Impingement Syndrome at 10%. The CI received the same rating percentages from the Air Force PEB and the VA for her back and left shoulder conditions.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00665

    Original file (PD 2013 00665.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBadjudicated “left shoulder impingement”as unfitting, rated 10%with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The herniated nucleus pulposus (HPN) at L4-5 and L5-S1; right foot bony prominent at base of the first metatarsals with no evidence of significant arthritis; and bilateral knee pain, was adjudicated as Category III conditions (not separately unfitting and do not contributing to the unfitting...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05954-03

    Original file (05954-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Osgood- In this regard, The Board noted that your receipt of a disability benefits from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Marine Corps was erroneous. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, either separately or in combination with others, rendered you unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010979

    Original file (20110010979.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    MEB Proceedings he provided in support of his previous application show, on 29 December 1992, an MEB diagnosed him to have chronic tendonitis of the left supraspinatus tendon, left patellar tendon, and left Achilles tendon, and recommended that he be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). f. A VA Rating Decision, dated 28 September 2004, showing he was granted service-connection for: (1) left shoulder tendonitis rated at 20% from 1 May 2000. The available records show no evidence...