DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX | URE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 05802-08
11 May 2009
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 23 April 2009. 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 did not accept your contention to the effect that
celiac sprue is a food allergy, and that your transfer to a non-
pay status in Navy Reserve in June 2006 was therefore erroneous.
The Board found that celiac sprue is a genetic disorder
manifested by an autoimmune response that can damage the small
intestine and cause malnutrition and other serious heaith
concerns. The presumption in favor of a finding of physical
qualification that applies to conditions such as food allergies,
personality disorders, and insect bite hypersensitivity, among
others, is not applicable to celiac sprue. The fact that the
Physical Evaluation Board ultimately determined that you were
physically qualified for further service does not invalidate
your transfer to a non-pay status or provide a basis for
granting you service credit and pay for duty you did not
perform. 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,
ROBERT D.MW#SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01119
CI CONTENTION :“Please consider increasing my disability rating to at least 30% which is more consistent with the VA's initial rating of 30% for my chronic GI illness dated 20020821 (please note, the 30% I received was the maximum allowed rating in code 7325/7319 of the VA's Schedule of Ratings for Irritable Colon Syndrome at the time of my separation.) I'd ask you to also consider my Anxiety Disorder related to general medical condition (VA 30% effective date 20060923) and Recurrent...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01614
In her request for an increase in her Air Force disability rating, she submits a DVA rating decision as evidence of an Air Force error. The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states her disability was more severe than the Air Force found while she was on active duty. Her condition was not rated by the DVA for a condition that deteriorated after discharge but...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01963
7/10 knee pain. The Board noted there was no compensable loss of motion or painful motion on the MEB exam, but a positive DeLuca with 5 degrees of loss of flexion on repetition a month prior to separation on the VA exam. 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 with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication.The Board did not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011330
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-35, states when the examining medical officer decides that a member being considered for elimination for misconduct (chapter 14) does not meet the retention medical standards, he or she will refer that member to a medical board. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before he or she can be medically retired or separated. He has failed to show...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05517-07
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. Although your last performance evaluation indicated that you were recommended for retention, the Board found that recommendation was not binding due to you being found unfit for sea duty because of the severity of your diagnosed food allergy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07438-00
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. Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure SECNAVINST 1850.4D 2016 Conditions Not Phvsical Disabilitv i Certain conditions and defects of a developmental nature designated by the Secretary of Defense do not constitute a physical disability and are not ratable in the absence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10613-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. On 20 August 2002 you were given a diagnosis of bee sting allergy, which was considered disqualifying for enlistment and not correctable to meet Navy Standards. 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101508
The Applicant wants the Separation Code, along with its corresponding Narrative Reason for Separation, changed. Relief denied.Issue 4: (Decisional) () .The Applicant suggests her post-service conduct, as evidenced by her college attendance, warrants consideration for changing her character of service, separation code, and narrative reason.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in changing the characterization of a discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11037-08
As a result of that rating action, your case was referred to the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for review. After being advised of the options available.to you, you elected to request transfer to the Retired List of the Marine Corps Reserve with entitlement to retired pay at age 60. 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.