DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 07446-07
1 July 2008
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 26 June 2008. 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.
The Board found that you served in the Marine Corps from 26 May
1998 to 31 August 1999, when you were released from active duty
transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with
a 40% disability rating for adult onset Still’s disease. The
Department of Veterans Affairs confirmed that diagnosis, and
assigned a 40% rating from 1 September 1999 to 1 May 2002, when
the rating was reduced to 0%. On 1 May 2004 you were discharged
from the Marine Corps by reason of physical disability, with
entitlement to severance pay. On 21 June 2004, the VA increased
your disability rating to 10%. The VA confirmed the 10% rating
in a rating decision dated 24 January 2006, based on a review of
hospital reports and outpatient treatment reports which show
that you had not had an exacerbation of the Still’s disease in
five years. You did not qualify for a 20% rating, which requires
one or two exacerbations per year, or a 40% rating, which
requires symptoms productive of definite impairment of health
objectively supported by examination findings, or incapacitating
exacerbations which occur at least three times a year. As you
have not demonstrated that your condition was severe enough on
30 April 2004 to have warranted a rating in excess of 10%, 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
Sincerely,
hae
Executive Di
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008149
On 1 November 2004, a medical evaluation board (MEB) convened and after consideration of clinical records, laboratory findings, and physical examinations, the MEB found the applicant was diagnosed as having the medically-unacceptable condition of Crohn's Disease. On 5 November 2004, an informal PEB convened and found the applicant's condition prevented him from performing the duties required of his grade and military specialty and determined he was physically unfit due to Crohn's disease...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00773
The VA rated the CI at 30% and specified “when taken as a whole, the evidence (particularly the records in the service medical records which show frequent exacerbations of this condition) that this condition is best classified as moderately severe.” The VA combined the CI’s GI symptoms of Crohn’s disease with Crohn’s related fistula-in-ano, GERD, and corrected anemia IAW §4.114 Schedule of Ratings—Digestive System. The Board directs its attention to its rating recommendations based on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04372-02
your back condition to Navy or Marine Corps officials after you underwent spinal disc surgery in 1990. The Board noted that although you suffered acute exacerbations of your back condition during periods of military duty in 1997 and 1999, you did not sustain any significant trauma to your spine during those , and there was permanent aggravation of the preexisting periods, you were not “injured” The exacerbations of your condition, one condition during those periods of military duty. VASRD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03049-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 1999. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty because of a lower back condition or a hiatal hernia at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable In addition, it noted that ratings to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00550
The medical basis for the separation was Crohn’s Disease. The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for the one condition, and separated at 10% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Air Force and Department of Defense regulations. The Board also considered the conditions of Fibrous Dysplasia Left Hip and Osteoporosis and unanimously determined that neither condition was unfitting at the time of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08355-01
In this regard, the E3oard noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty. The Board concluded that had the PEB had found your arthritis to be unfitting as of 1 October 1994, it is unlikely that you would have received a substantial rating for that condition, because substantial deductions would have been taken from the rating for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07295-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. 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 | CY2012 | PD 2012 00691
TDRL RATING COMPARISON: Final Service PEB - 20021105 VA (12 months prior to separation) Effective 20020311 On TDRL - 20010512 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Condition TDRL Sep. SLE 6350 60% 10% SLE 6350 60%* STR from 20020311 to 20021220 and Civilian records from 20030103 to 20031215 All others x 4/ Not Service Connected X 3 Combined: 60% . The Board also agreed the rating at the time of TDRL placement is consistent with a 60% rating for an unstable condition that had resulted in...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00777
The CI’s treating neurosurgeon five months prior to separation documented that the CI had severe degenerative changes and injury was likely to leave the CI with chronic back pain, limited mobility and physical disability. 5292 Spine, limitation of motion of, lumbar: There was no clear mechanism to separate out the CI’s radicular pain from his unfitting back condition and the primary focus on medical evaluations was the CI’s back and S1 radiating pain conditions.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06432-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 April 2002. Notwithstanding those findings, the VA awarded you a 60% rating under VA cod 5293, effective from 17 July 1999, for pronounced intervertebral disc disease, which is the highest permitted rating for that condition. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...