DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 09891-07
22 August 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 21 August 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.
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 11 March 2003.
On 4 October 2004, you were found not suitable for operational
duty until such time as your elevated blood pressure could be
adequately controlled. You were discharged for the convenience
of the government on 30 November 2004, without objection from
you, due to a condition, not a disability, which interfered
you’re your performance of duty. On 11 October 2005, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) granted your request for
service connection for high blood pressure, and assigned a 10%
rating for that condition effective 1 December 2004. On 14
September 2007, the VA awarded you a 50% rating for obstructive
sleep apnea, effective from 20 February 2007.
In order to be entitled to disability separation or retirement
from the naval service, a service member must be unfit to
reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or
rating by reason of physical disability. While your record
shows that you were operationally unsuitable due to your
incompletely controlled high blood pressure, it does not show
that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability.
Your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA is
not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your
naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without
regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on the
date of your discharge from the Navy. 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,
Dead
W. DEAN PFEKFF
Executive Dil
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 | CY2006 | 10687-06
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that he is entitled to separation pay, was retired by reason of physical disability, and is not required to repay the unearned portion of his selective reenlistment bonus. On 21 December 2005, Petitioner was advised that he could be subject to administrative separation action unless he...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02594
The narrative summarydated 12 December 2007, 7 months prior to separation and dictated by the attending physician, noted the heat stroke to be medically unacceptable, but anemia, high blood pressure (hypertension), protein in the urine (after the acute renal failure), and liver injury (hepatotoxicity) were all determined to be medically acceptable for retention. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000463
The applicant requests his honorable discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) be changed to a medical discharge or that he be reinstated in the USAR to complete his remaining 5 years of service for a 20-year retirement. In a memorandum, dated 16 January 2008, the CO of HRC-STL responded to the applicant and stated the following: * The applicant was issued mobilization orders in November 2006 * The applicant submitted a request to delay his entry on active duty for 77 days * The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03290-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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 | CY2009 | PD2009-00630
Although no treatment record diagnosis of hypertension (HTN) was found in the records available to the Board, the MEB physical note indicated medication for blood pressure and the VA records indicated a diagnosis of HTN while in service in 2006 while on active duty. The Board deliberated what the CI’s HTN would rate under code 7101 (required for consideration in rating renal disease) and considered the evidence of likely in-service labile HTN, and that the VA HTN exam three months post...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02771-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2010. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden -is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02133-07
The Board noted that you will be entitled to retired pay at age 60 as a former member of the Navy Reserve. Although you suffered from a number of medical conditions during your period of naval service, to include the mild left ventricular hypertrophy, a cervical spine condition, and controlled sleep apnea, which the VA rated at 30, 30 and 503%, respectively, there is no indication in the available records that any of those conditions Significantly impaired your ability to perform your...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00475
The applicant’s Report of Medical Examination, dated 29 September 1999, indicates at the time of the applicant’s enlistment, his blood pressure was normal. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommended denial indicating the applicant manifested two chronic medical conditions within six weeks of entry onto active duty while in basic training: pompholyx/eczema of the feet and essential hypertension (high blood...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02163
No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “interstitial nephritis requiring chronic steroid treatment, recent creatinine normal”as unfitting, rated 0%, referencing the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent...