DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX :
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51006
JRE
Docket No. 00601-09
25 January 2010
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 14 January 2010. 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.
You enlisted in the Navy yon 30 September 2008. On 11 October
2008 you sought medical care for pain at the base of your spine,
and disclosed that the pain had begun before you enlisted.
Examination disclosed a 2cm X .5cm cyst. You were given a
diagnosis of a pilonidal cyst, and recommended for discharge by
reason of erroneous entry. You did not request a waiver of
physical disqualification in order to remain on active duty or
contest the proposed discharge. You were discharged by reason
of erroneous entry on 31 October 2008 and assigned a reentry
code of RE-3E.
The Board was not persuaded that your condition was misdiagnosed
as a pilonidal cyst or that you were discharged from the Navy in
error. It noted that you were unable to complete recruit
training due to a condition which existed prior to your
enlistment which you failed to disclose prior to commencing
recruit training. In addition, as your reentry code is waivable,
it should not preclude your reenlistment if you can demonstrate
that the condition which resulted in your discharge no longer
exists. 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,
\DRostull”
1
W. DEAN P
Executive tor
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101864
Since the Applicant served only 16 days, an Uncharacterized discharge is the most appropriate characterization of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper but not equitable.Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but the narrative reason for separation shall change to.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01070-07
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.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 Marine Corps on 1 May 1969. On 20 May 1969, a medical...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00262
In the progress note dated 1 May 2008, the rheumatologist stated his fatigue, chronic back pain, non-restorative sleep pattern, and muscle skeletal pain suggests fibrositis but he didn’t meet the ACR criteria for fibromyalgia because he did not have 11/18 trigger points positive. Pain was rated 8.5/10. On 23 April 2010, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) took action in your case by accepting the recommendation of the PDBR that no change be made to the...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01934
No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “recurring pilonidal cyst”as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The rating for the unfitting recurring pilonidal cyst condition is addressed below including possible residuals; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Additionally, he also had difficulties with his...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00663
Left Knee Condition . Other Conditions : The CI additionally contended for lower back, and depression with insomnia conditions which the VA rated and associated with the CI’s knee condition; tinnitus which the VA rated at 10%; and right leg and bilateral ankles. Exhibit C. Department of Veterans' Affairs Treatment Record.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004188
On 3 September 2003, a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) was held which found the applicant to be physically unfit due to coccydynia with pain that is marked and constant, and recommended that he be discharged with severance pay, rated 20 percent disabled. Coccyx injury is a tailbone trauma which is an injury to the small bone at the lower tip of the spine. Without a diagnosed condition which was determined medically disqualifying, there is no basis for increasing the applicants 20 percent...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00314-07
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. The Board concluded that the entry in your evaluation report for the 17 January-5 November 1968 period concerning “trouble” with your back” refers to recurrent infections of a pilonidal cyst which required extensive treatment, rather than to a traumatic back injury. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03217-02
A three-~nember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2002. The medical board report indicates that you had undc:.guw an osteotomy in 1979 to cc)rr'Cd dysplasia of your left hip, and that you had been active in sports and had little difficulty with your hip since that time. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00444-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2011. This condition existed prior to your enlistment. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011821
The opinion states that the applicant requests his military records be changed to reflect disability compensation for the scar that resulted from surgery on his pilonidal cyst and that he claims the scar was the result of medical malpractice and therefore should be compensated. The opinion points out that on 8 June 2004 an informal PEB found the applicant's pilonidal cyst had existed prior to service and that its condition had worsened as a result of the natural progression of the EPTS...