Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06153-05
Original file (06153-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO
                  JRE
                                                                                          Docket No. 06153-05
                                                                                          10 October 2006





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 28 September 2006. 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 you underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 23 June 2001 and were found qualified for enlistment, notwithstanding the fact that you had bilateral pes planus (flat feet). You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 18 June 2002. On 30 October 2002, you reported a two and one-half month history of bilateral foot pain. There is no indication in the available records that you sustained any significant traumatic injuries to your feet. On 4 December 2002, a physician’s assistant recommended that you be administratively discharged because of symptomatic pes planus and associated plantar fasciitis. You were discharged from the Marine Corps with an uncharacterjzed entry level separation on 17 January 2003, by reason of a condition, not a disability, that interfered with your performance of duty. On 9 June 2004, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a 50% rating for bilateral pes planus with plantar fasciltis, effective 18 January 2003. On 22 August 2005, the VA added a 10% rating for exercise induced asthma. That rating was also effective from 18 January 2003.


The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by reason of a physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of military service. In addition, it concluded that even if you had been considered unfit for duty because of your bilateral foot condition, you would not have been entitled to a disability rating of 30% or higher, which is the minimum rating that a service member must receive in order to qualify for disability retirement. The fact that the VA granted you service connection and a substantial disability rating for two conditions does not demonstrate that you should have been separated or retired from the Marine Corps by reason of physical disability. In this regard, the Board noted that the operations of the Department of the Navy and the VA are governed by different statutes and regulations, each department makes independent disability determinations, and that those the determinations of one department are not binding on the other.
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
                                                     

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00707

    Original file (PD2009-00707.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA considered the CI’s foot conditions (Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis with Pes Planus) as combining for foot disability IAW VASRD §4.71a-29 using rating Code 5276 Flatfoot; acquired and awarded the CI with a rating of 30% (severe, bilateral). The Board considered the overlap of foot symptoms from the two inter-related conditions (Plantar Fasciitis and Pes Planus) and rating as a single bilateral code of 5276 at 30% (severe, bilateral) as the VA rated the combined foot conditions. After...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01752

    Original file (PD-2013-01752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Over several months she noted improvement with Zoloft, which when discontinued in December1998, she again became depressedand it was reintroduced.In June 1999, she became overwhelmed by a move to a new duty station and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01157

    Original file (PD2012 01157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The IPEB adjudicated bilateral plantar fasciitisas unfitting, rated 10% and 0% (not specified, but probably left and right, respectively) with likely application of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The bilateral pes planus condition was determined to be a Category IIcondition (one which contributes to the unfitting condition).The CI appealed to the Formal PEB (FPEB), which changed the PEB ratingfor the plantar fasciitis...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00592

    Original file (PD2009-00592.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for the Sinus Tarsi Syndrome condition, and separated at 10% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Naval and Department of Defense regulations. The CI was separated on 20020814 for Sinus Tarsi Syndrome with chronic bilateral foot and ankle pain rated analogously as code 5279, Metatarsalgia, anterior, (Morton’s Disease), unilateral or bilateral, which assigns...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00925

    Original file (PD2010-00925.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Hammer Toe Deformities52820%Bilateral Pes Planus w/ Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis S/P Bilateral Hammer Toe Repair of 2 nd , 3 rd and 4 th Toes527610%20070103Moderate Flat FootCat II↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓Thoracolumbar Strain; DDD L5-S1523720%20070103Right Shoulder Strain5299- 502410%20070103Left Shoulder Strain5299-502410%20070103GERD and Hiatal Hernia734610%20070103Tinnitus626010%200701030% x 2 / Not Service Connected x 120070103...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01841

    Original file (PD-2013-01841.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the right anterior knee pain as unfitting, rated 0%IAW the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD); the pes planus and secondary plantar fasciitis was determined to have existed prior to service, were not permanently service aggravated and therefore not compensable. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Right Anterior Knee Pain5099-50030%Residuals, Right Knee Injury 526010%20060119Pes...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00147

    Original file (PD2013 00147.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION : “I had four different surgical procedures done by the Army on both feet which has resulted in continued pain, callouses and deformity of my toes in addition as a result of my military service. The examination was based on her evaluation on 28 October 2003. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01102

    Original file (PD2011-01102.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the bilateral, plantar fasciitis and bilateral flat feet conditions as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. It noted the progression of the bilateral foot pain despite conservative treatment and limitation of activities; “currently, her feet still hurt and she is not doing any high impact activities but the pain is starting to increase.” The examination documented bilateral pes planus and tenderness on...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00173

    Original file (PD2009-00173.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW Three other lower extremity conditions (listed in the table below) were found to be Category II (related to the Unfitting Bilateral Pes Planus Condition). He reported that the low back pain occurs after standing a long time, and he feels it is due to his bilateral pes planus (flatfeet).

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01894

    Original file (PD2012 01894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION : “Medical Board combined Right and Left conditions as one and left off pes planus from diagnostic evaluation. All members agreed, however, that separate ratings (unilateral or bilateral) under separate codes was not compliant with VASRD §4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding), which specifies that “the evaluation of the same manifestation under different diagnoses are to be avoided.” Specifically a separate compensable rating for pes planus, as contended by the CI and conferred by...