DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 03531-03
4 September 2003
From:
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
FORMER
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) Subject's naval record
(2) Capt. B.C.
Gumpert, MC, USN,
ltr, 10 Aug 30
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an
enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board
requesting that his record be corrected to show that he does not
suffer from asthma or allergic rhinitis.
consisting of Messrs. Adams, Geisler and Pfeiffer,
2. The Board,
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 28
August 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that
the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record.
Documentary material considered
by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as
follows:
a.
Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.
Petitioner's application to the Board was filed in a
timely manner.
C .
In correspondence attached as enclosure
(2), the Board was
advised by the Specialty Advisor for Pulmonary Medicine, in
effect, that the diagnoses of chronic persistent asthma and
allergic rhinitis should be removed from Petitioner's record, as
there is insufficient documentation, at present, to make those
He recommended, however, that if Petitioner applies
diagnoses.
for reenlistment, he should receive a pre-entry pulmonary
medicine evaluation, to include a methacholine challenge test.
If the test results show bronchial hyper-responsiveness, they
would support a diagnosis of chronic mild asthma and preclude
military service based on current instruction.
CONCLUSION:
After careful consideration of all of the evidence of record,
and especially in view of the comments contained in enclosure
(2), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting
the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he was discharged on 12 December 2002 by reason of Secretarial
plenary authority.
b.
That the diagnoses of chronic persistent asthma and
allergic rhinitis, and all references thereto, be removed from
Petitioner's naval record.
C .
That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating
to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or
completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such
entries or material be added to the record in the future.
d.
That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.
e.
That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board,
of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file maintained
for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of
the Petitioner's naval record.
together with this Report
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
review and deliberations,
and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6e
of the Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records
723.6e, and having
(32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
ensured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced
that the foregoing corrective action,
of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of
the Secretary of the Navy.
taken under the provisions
Executive D
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02634
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. RATING COMPARISON : IPEB – Dated 20050808VA* - based on Service Treatment Records(STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Asthma66020%Asthma660210%STR**Other MEB/PEB Conditions x 5 (Not In Scope)Other x 1 RATING:...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00850
Asthma Condition . In the matter of the asthma condition, the Board unanimously recommends a TDRL and permanent service disability rating of 30%, coded 6602 IAW VASRD §4.97. Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01552
The service treatment record (STR) initially reflected that the CI wasbeing worked-up for a respiratory condition noting the first of many spirometry/pulmonary function tests (PFTs) dated 28 August 2002. The CI was never placed on oral corticosteroids; therefore, Board members deliberated if the CI’s condition supported the 30% criteria level.Clearly, the final pulmonology report noted no use of medication for the previous “several months.”Additionally, the post-separation VA examination...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01248
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the asthma condition as unfitting, rated 10% with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB were allergic rhinitis, intermittent non-radiating lower back pain, essential hypertension, chronic gastritis and hypercholesterolemia. Providing a correction to the individuals separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00908
SEPARATION DATE: 20040312 Asthma Condition . The diagnosis in his finding of unfitness for Asthma,VASRD Code 6602, was rated at 30% rather than 10%.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00263
The PEB’s DA Form 199 dated 20050413 indicated “Asthma, with normal spirometry, on intermittent inhalational bronchodilator therapy.” The PEB specified “Medication profile shows no controller medication between March – April 2004 and 15 February 2005.” The PEB permanent separation rating was 6602 at 10%; and the VASRD 10% criteria contains the phrasing “intermittent inhalational or oral bronchodilator therapy.” There is therefore no evidence that the provisions of DoDI 1332.39 were applied. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01602
DATE OF PLACEMENT ON TDRL: 20030706Date of Permanent SEPARATION: 20040720 BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication.The Board did not surmise from the record or PEB ruling in this case that any prerogatives outside the VASRD were exercised.In the matter of the asthma condition and...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00024
My sinus rating is 50% now. All evidence considered, and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the majority of the Board recommends a disability rating of 30% as the fair permanent separation rating for asthma (6602) in this case. 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 his prior medical separation:
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01959
SEPARATION DATE: 20021002 The Board gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation. The allergist noted that despite daily use of BD and steroid inhalers symptoms remained.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01956
The MEB also identified and forwarded two other conditions (allergic rhinitis and gastroesophagealreflux disease [GERD]) as medically acceptable.The Informal PEB adjudicated “mild intermittent asthma”as unfitting, rated 10%,with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of...