Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04596-06
Original file (04596-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00


JRE
                                                                                 Docket No. 04596-06
         11 September 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 8 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 enlisted in the Navy on 23 March 1984. You were evaluated by a medical board on 11 July 1988 and given a diagnosis of testicular cancer; consequently, you were placed on limited duty for a period of two years. On 25 April 1990, a medical board reevaluated your condition and determined that you were fit for duty. You were voluntarily released from active duty on 4 May 1990, and assigned a reentry code of RE-Ri, to indicate that you were eligible and recommended for reenlistment, but you did not choose to reenlist. On 4 January 1991, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a disability rating of 10% for cancer of the left testicle, status/post removal of the testicle with lymph node dissection. You were also awarded special monthly compensation for the anatomical loss of a creative organ.







The Board noted that while the VA must rate all conditions that were incurred in or aggravated by a veteran’s period of service, the military departments may assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability. As your history of cancer and the associated removal of a testicle and lymph nodes did not render you unfit for duty, there is no basis for granting your request for disability separation or retirement. 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 | 03957-08

    Original file (03957-08.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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059230C070421

    Original file (2001059230C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That his condition has been diagnosed as moderate to severe aortic insufficiency with dilated aortic root (Marfan’s like syndrome), and that if his record of his medical condition was accurate upon his retirement, it would have shown a serious condition related to his cardio system. The applicant submits 16 tabs with his application, showing his medical...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10443-07

    Original file (10443-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 16 December 2008, after reviewing enclosures (2) and (3), and Petitioner’s response thereto, the Board recommended that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Director, Secretary of the Navy Counsel of Review Boards (SECNAVCORB) advised the Board, in effect, that Petitioner fell under the PFIT provisions of DOD Instruction 1332.38, which are applicable to service members who are...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00680

    Original file (PD 2012 00680.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Bilateral Groin Pain. The profile further recommended a MOS/Medical Review Board (MMRB). He was evaluated and found to have multiple painful lymph nodes and otherwise his extensive workup did not reveal an etiology for his symptoms.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00559-01

    Original file (00559-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 22 January 2001 with enclosure, a copy of which is attached. When the petitioner acknowledged the adverse nature of the report on 20 June 1999 (evidence her signature in Section Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF GUNNERY SERGEANT SMC ment of rebuttal , she had still not furnished her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002755

    Original file (0002755.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, HQ AFPC/DPPD, also reviewed this application and states the medical disability evaluation system is used to determine if the service member’s medical condition renders him fit or unfit for continued military service. They further state that under military disability laws and policy, the boards can only rate those medical conditions which make the member unfit for...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00006

    Original file (PD2010-00006.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the matter of the right inguinal neuralgia condition with chronic right groin pain condition, the Board unanimously recommends a rating of 10% coded 8630 IAW VASRD §4.124a. In the matter of the right inguinal scar condition, the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend a finding of unfit for additional rating at separation. Exhibit C. Department of Veterans' Affairs Treatment Record.

  • CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2005-078

    Original file (2005-078.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical board noted that the applicant had been offered two years of limited duty for follow-up of his cancer, but now desired a medical board. (2) of the PDES Manual states when the CPEB (or FPEB) reviews the case of a member on the TDRL findings are required for any impairment not previously rated. The evidence further shows that the applicant was placed on the TDRL on March 15, 1999 due to "malignant neoplasm of the genitourinary system" with a 30% disability rating and that no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004701

    Original file (20140004701.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The physician stated the applicant was being seen for right neck pain. b. Paragraph 4–2 (Soldiers with suspended sentences) states a Soldier may not be referred for, or continue, disability processing if under sentence of dismissal or punitive discharge. The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by a GCM of being AWOL/deserting in an attempt to avoid deployment and he was ordered to be discharged with a BCD.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00942

    Original file (PD-2012-00942.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence supporting any organic changes to the nerve is the decreased sensation in the distribution of the femoral nerve. Although the Board recognizes that VASRD code 8626 is a better fit for the actual disability present, there is no benefit to the CI in changing the code, as the Board’s final rating recommendation would be the same as the 20% rating adjudicated by the PEB. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record SFMR‐RB XXXXXXXXXX,...