DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Decket No. 11339-0908
24 November 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 19 November 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 found that you were evaluated by the Physical
Evaluation Board on 3 March 2008 and were found fit for duty
despite your condition of foot and ankle pain. As you were not
considered suitable. for submarine service due to your continued
complaints of pain, you were discharged on 31 July 2008 due to a
condition, not a disability, that interfered with your
performance of duty. On 22 October: 2008, the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a combined disability rating
of 80% for irritable bowel syndrome, gastroesophageal reflux
disease and hiatal hernia; generalized anxiety disorder;
Raynaud's syndrome, bilateral, feet; degenerative disc disease
of the thoracolumbar spine; flat feet; a painful right ankle;
and hypertension.
The Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from
the VA for numerous conditions 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 for military duty. In the absence of evidence which
demonstrates that you were unfit for duty on 31 July 2008, 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
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
yond. b
W. DEAN PFEDEHS
Executive D or
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00629
The CI underwent three complex surgeries to correct the bilateral ankle pathology, however, he continued with pain stiffness and limited motion in both ankles and feet. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00592
The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for the Sinus Tarsi Syndrome condition, and separated at 10% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Naval and Department of Defense regulations. The CI was separated on 20020814 for Sinus Tarsi Syndrome with chronic bilateral foot and ankle pain rated analogously as code 5279, Metatarsalgia, anterior, (Morton’s Disease), unilateral or bilateral, which assigns...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01261
The PEB adjudicated the patellofemoral syndrome bilateral as unfitting, rated 10%, with application the Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The PEB on 9 October 2002, three months prior to separation, found patellofemoral syndrome, bilateral, unfitting, coded 5299-5003 (arthritis, degenerative) with a rating of 10%. The VA rationale noted that the ratings were non-compensable because the C&P examination documented full ROM without pain, no instability and...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00462
The PEB adjudicated “seronegative lyme disease manifested by chronic fatigue and arthralgias of the shoulder, hands knees, ankles and feet” condition as unfitting, rated 20%, with application of the Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). CI CONTENTION : “Initial rating by VA dated submitted April 14 2003 approved September 11, 2003 overall rating 30%, 20% residuals of lyme disease 10% recurrent rash with vesicles: 2005 20% Chronic Fatigue Syndrome added. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00988
SAFPC, on 27 May 2008, found only the low back pain condition unfitting with a 10% rating, coded 5242. The Board noted that the profiles do not specify limitations based on ankle pain versus low back pain. After careful consideration of your application and treatment records, the Physical Disability Board of Review determined that the rating assigned at the time of final disposition of your disability evaluation system processing was appropriate.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04587-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2010. 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 | CY2011 | PD2011-00189
X-rays were normal, but bilateral weight-bearing X-rays performed four months later showed pes planus. The NARSUM examiner (two weeks later) recorded a history of mild bilateral ankle pain, which was considered not unfitting by the PEB and rated 0% by the VA. The Board considered that the presence of functional impairment with a direct impact on fitness is the key determinant in the Board’s decision to recommend any condition for rating as additionally unfitting.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01985
According to the VASRD rules for rating the spine in effect at the time of separation thoracic and lumbar spine conditions coded IAW §4.71a are provided a single disability rating and thus the thoracic DDD and the lumbago (listed by the PEB as separate conditions) are subsumed in the §4.71a rating that follows. Since the disability due only to the left foot cannot be isolated by the clinical evidence or from the fitness implications of the bilateral condition, the Board consensus was that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016435
In 2001, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) diagnosed him with: * chronic bilateral ankle pain/sinus tarsi pain, idiopathic * right knee pain, chondromalacia, left knee post-op scarring/inflammation * right elbow epicondylitis * DeQuervains disease, right wrist * scrotal pain, unclear etiology 4. Rated for pain in accordance with U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency pain policy. However, the evidence shows the PEB found him physically unfit due to ankle, knee, and scrotal pain.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07914-08
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, other than patellofemoral syndrome, rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your...