NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500844
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge characterization was improper (B).Under applicable regulations, the only authorized characterizations of service for a separation by reason of defective enlistments and inductions – erroneous enlistment is honorable or entry...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00203
During his evaluation for the Pectus Carinatum chest wall deformity, CI was found to have a “Sinus Venosus” form of ASD, as well as partially anomalous pulmonary venous connections from the upper lobe of the right lung. There is no evidence that the heart condition (after correction) interfered with performance of required military duties or was unfitting at the time of separation from service. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00163
The CI was placed on Limited Duty (LIMDU) on 20050908 for the GSW to the chest and RUE. Chest Condition . In light of the evidence of impairment indicated by the numerous treatment notes for chest pain (also see the PTSD condition with chest pain as a contributor), the NMA statement, and the post-separation continued disability due to the chest condition, the CI’s chest condition should be recharacterized as a separate unfitting and ratable disability at the time of separation.
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00468
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. ND04-00468 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20040128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970407 with a uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to failing...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00108
These were not documented by the PEB or MEB and are therefore not within the purview of the Board.In addition, the Board determined that the preponderance of evidence does not support the VA determination that the restrictive lung disease conditionwas a residual condition resulting from the unfitting rhabdomyolysis condition. It was determined that he was non-deployable and an MEB indicated. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00482
The MEB identified and forwarded only the chronic chest wall pain condition for Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication. The VASRD in effect at the time of separation utilized the subjective criteria of slight, for a 0% rating; moderate, for a 10% rating and moderately severe or severe for a 20% rating for rating purposes under code 5321. RECOMMENDATION: The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows, effective as of the date of her prior medical...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00039
The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. In the matter of the chest wall and right shoulder condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 40%, coded 8699-8610 IAW VASRD §4.123a. Providing orders showing that the individual was retired with permanent disability effective the...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02121
He was placed on light duty and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Left Chest Wall Pain, S/P Pectoralis Major Repair Condition . The VA also coded the left pectoral muscle and tendon tear (minor) 5303 and rated at 20%.All documents proximate to the date of separation noted pain and tenderness in the chest wall and left upper extremity with non-compensable ROM measurements.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900225
Although the Applicant provided post-service medical documentation which was consistent with his pre-service medical evaluations, the Board finds it does not mitigate the diagnosis by the military cardiologist at the medical clinic in Great Lakes.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00213-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2001. 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. Testing conducted on 27 June 2000 disclosed the presence of a thickened and redundant mitral valve leaflet and redundant membranous VSD.