Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01691-03
Original file (01691-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                                                                          JRE
                                                                                          Docket No. 01691-03
                                                                                          25 August 2003

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 21 August 2003. 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 found that on 9 September 1997, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of sensory changes of the right L5-S1 spinal nerve roots, secondary to cauda equina syndrome. You accepted those findings on 18 September 1997, and you were discharged on 31 December 1997 with entitlement to disability severance pay. On 10 July 1998, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you ratings of 20% for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine, with absent ankle jerk, 10% for arthritis of the left knee, 10% for a scar, and 0% for additional scars and tinnitus. Your request for service connection for several other conditions was denied. The rating for degenerative joint disease was increased to 60% effective 1 January 1998, based on a post-service increase in the severity of that condition.

The Board noted that rating assigned by the military departments are fixed as of the date of separation or permanent retirement, whereas the VA may adjust ratings throughout a veteran’s lifetime as the severity of rated conditions change. In addition, the military departments rate only those conditions that render a service member unfit for duty, while the VA rates all conditions it classifies as ‘service connected”, without regard to the issue of fitness for duty. As you have not demonstrated that your condition was ratable at or above 30% disabling on the date of your discharge from the Marine Corps, or that you were unfit for duty because of a knee condition or a scar, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07295-02

    Original file (07295-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04018-08

    Original file (04018-08.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. The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA effective the day after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050002917

    Original file (20050002917.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The request of the applicant and his counsel that he receive a medical discharge based on a 30% disability rating, which in effect is a request to review the PEB findings and recommendations made in his case, and the supporting documents submitted were carefully considered. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was properly processed through the PDES in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations, and was separated with severance pay by reason of physical disability based on...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00360

    Original file (PD2010-00360.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Left Wrist Condition. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. In the matter of the right knee pain, right ankle pain, and left knee pain conditions or any other medical conditions eligible for Board consideration, the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend any findings of unfit for additional rating at separation.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00281

    Original file (PD2009-00281.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA rated it using the code for ankle, limited range-of-motion (ROM) and rated the nerve condition separately as well. The Left Sural Nerve Neuralgia was not documented prior to second surgery (tendon repair) and the CI was not referred to the PEB until after he had left foot pain in addition to his left ankle pain. The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating XXXXXXXXXX be corrected to show that the diagnoses in his finding of unfitness were Chronic Left...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00494

    Original file (PD2011-00494.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Flexion (140⁰ normal)“approximately 0 to 125⁰”100⁰110⁰Extension (0⁰ normal)0⁰0⁰CommentVarus deformity, palpable femoral osteophytes, scar, crepitus, TTP, no instability (including Lachman’s), neg McMurray’s, mildly pos patellar grind3+ effusion, TTP (medial joint line & lat epicondyle), 30 ml normal joint fluid aspirated, steroid injected; Hx incr pain & effusion due to moving over last 2-3 wks, no lockingPainful motion, crepitus, scar nontender, no instability (including Lachman’s), neg...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00179

    Original file (PD2009-00179.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA did rate this condition at 20%. While there was no instability or decreased flexion of the knee at the time of separation from service, the CI did have painful motion of the right knee. The Board also considered Peyronie’s disease with Erectile Dysfunction and Dupuytren‘s Contractures and found no evidence to support a determination that these conditions were unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00480

    Original file (PD2009-00480.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was on two periods of limited duty for his right shoulder and he was then referred to the Navy Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). Other conditions rated by the VA (left knee, right knee and Anxiety Disorder) as well as heart condition and right wrist not rated by the VA appear to be what the CI is contending for in addition to re-rating his right shoulder. Service Treatment Record.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00513

    Original file (PD2011-00513.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    In TDRL cases, the Board must also adhere to the DES standard that only those conditions which were present and unfitting at the time of temporary retirement may be considered for compensation and rating at the time of permanent separation or retirement. Left Knee Condition. The VA reviewed both of these examinations as well as its own C&P examination and determined an overall 30% rating.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00260

    Original file (PD2011-00260.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Bilateral Knee Condition . All evidence considered, the Board recommends that each knee be separately adjudicated as unfitting, coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%. In the matter of the bilateral knee condition, the Board by a vote of 2:1 recommends that each joint be separately adjudicated as follows: an unfitting right knee condition coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%; and, an unfitting left knee condition coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%; both IAW VASRD §4.71a.