Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05642-05
Original file (05642-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 05642-05
11 September 2006


This is in reference to your- application to 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 8 September 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of t 1 is Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of you application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, you 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 you served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 6 June 1967 to 29 December 1970, when you were discharged by reason of unsuitability due to a character or behavior disorder. The Veterans Administration (VA) awarded you a 10% rating for brain trauma residual to a shell fragment wound effective 30 December 1970. You underwent VA neuropsychiatric examinations on 7 April 1971 and 1 February 1972, which were negative for any ratable psychiatric disorder. In 1977 you were diagnosed with latent schizophrenia, and submitted a request for service connection for a mental disorder. In a rating decision dated 28 November 1977, the VA granted you service connection and a 50% disability rating for schizophrenia, which was felt to be the “...maturation of passive aggressive personality disorder and residuals of brain trauma.”

         The Board carefully considered the contents of your VA claims folder, but found the records contained therein to be insufficient to demonstrate that you were unfit for service by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge. Implicit in the VA rating decision summarized above is the finding that although your present mental disorder is related to your personality disorder and wounds you sustained while on active duty, the disorder did not exist as a ratable entity prior to your discharge or for several years thereafter. The Board noted that although the VA may assign and adjust disability ratings throughout a veteran’s lifetime, the military departments may assign disability ratings only in those cases where a service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability. In those cases where disability ratings are assigned, the ratings are fixed as of the date of separation or permanent retirement, and may not be adjusted to reflect changes that occur thereafter. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend 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,





W. DEAN PFIEFFER
Executive Director








Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030407

    Original file (20100030407.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record confirms the applicant was properly processed through the Army's PDES. The evidence of record is void of any medical treatment records indicating the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD during his processing through the PDES or prior to his discharge. The rating decision shows the applicant is properly being treated and compensated for his service-connected PTSD and other conditions by the VA, which is the appropriate agency to provide these services for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05793-08

    Original file (05793-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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 | PD2011-00950

    Original file (PD2011-00950.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the cognitive disorder as unfitting, rated 10%; citing a criterion of Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.39, but rating IAW criteria of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) in effect for code 8045 (brain disease due to trauma). In the matter of the seizure disorder due to TBI, the Board unanimously recommends that it be added as an additionally unfitting condition for disability rating, coded 8045-8910 and rated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01533

    Original file (PD-2013-01533.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal PEB adjudicated “TBI with residual neck pain and headaches;” “low back pain (LBP);” and “left knee pain with degenerative joint disease (DJD),” as unfitting, rated at 10%, 10%, and 0% respectively, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board could not find evidence in the commander’s statement or elsewhere in the treatment record that documented any significant interference of the neck pain condition with the performance of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00363

    Original file (PD2009-00363.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the CI had separated after the current TBI rating criteria was in effect, he would have rated at 40% if his cognitive impairment was considered mild (level 2) or 70% if his cognitive impairment was considered moderate (level 3). After careful consideration of all available information, the Board concluded by simple majority that the CI’s condition is appropriately rated at a combined 40% with 30% for 8045-9304 Traumatic Brain Injury with Mild to Moderate Cognitive Impairment, 10% for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11019-06

    Original file (11019-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 you were discharged from the Navy by reason of physical disability on 6...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01325

    Original file (PD-2012-01325.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was then medically separated with a 10% disability rating. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the headaches and dizziness following head trauma condition. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: UNFITTING...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00774

    Original file (PD 2013 00774.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB determined that the cognitive disorder was unfitting and recommended separation at 10%, coded 9304 on 11August 2005, 2 months prior to separation. The CI was able to work full time at a familiar job, although she took more time to complete tasks than prior to the MVA and also used a checklist. The Board also determined that although the symptoms of depression and anxiety were noted to be worsening at the time of the final neuro-psychological testing, the CI was noted to be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00145

    Original file (PD2009-00145.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discussion: The CI was diagnosed with PTSD and was found unfit for PTSD at 10%. VARD (diagnosed as Tinnitus) 20080516 and rated it at 10% based on exam of 20080107: The condition is noted in your service treatment records as of May 3, 2007; We have assigned a 10 percent evaluation based on examination findings that has determined, your tinnitus is persistent in nature; the diagnosis that has been given is ringing in the left ear. There is no hearing loss present on the right and there is...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00114

    Original file (PD2011-00114.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since the injury he suffered from headaches and one isolated seizure in October 2004. The Board considered at length both the TDRL rating and the final rating recommendations at separation from the TDRL. The VASRD does allow for a 10% rating for the cranial defect and the Board, by simple majority, recommends addition of this condition as unfitting, coded 5296, with a 10% TDRL rating and a 10% final rating.