DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
[BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
“TOR
Docket No: 5706-09
13 August 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 11 August 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 18 May 1988 at age 27. You served
without disciplinary infraction until 1 September 1989 when you
were absent from your appointed place of duty. On 14 November
1989 you were again absent from your appointed place of duty.
During the period from 21 to 24 November 1989 you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status for three days. The record,
however, does not reflect the disciplinary action taken for these
periods of absence.
On 17 January 1990 you were convicted by civil authorities of
driving while intoxicated. As a result, your recommendation for
advancement wags withdrawn and you received a special performance
avaluation which documented your substandard performance and
conduct.
During the period from 6 June to 25 September 1990, after
undergoing a physical evaluation for patella tendinitis, Osgood-
Schlatter’s disease, and hypertrophic fat pad of the left knee,
you were found to be unfit for further service. At that time you
were also recommended for an administrative separation. As a
result, you were processed for an administrative separation by
reason of convenience of the government due to a physical
disability as evidenced by the patella tendinitis, Osgood-
Schlatter’s disease, and hypertrophic fat pad of the left knee,
which existed prior to enlistment. On 7 November 1990 the
discharge authority directed discharge under honorable
conditions, and on 23 November 1990 you were issued a general
discharge.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.4. An average
of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for
a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in, its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade the characterization of your general
discharge and request for entitlement to benefits under the
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB). Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your general discharge because of your substandard performance
and conduct, civil conviction, and since your conduct average was
insufficiently high to warrant a fully honorable characterization
of service. Finally, the Board noted that you did not meet the
criteria necessary to be eligible for MGIB benefits, and that the
contributions you paid were nonrefundable. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
LoWenes
W. DEAN PF
Executive Diiredgtor
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01985
RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20050224VA -Based on Service Treatment Records(STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Bilateral Knee Pain Secondary To Osgood-Schlatter Disease5099-50030%Osgood-Schlatter Disease, Left Knee5299-526010%STROsgood-Schlatter Disease, Right Knee5299-526010%STROther Conditions in Scope x 0Other x 6 Combined: 0%Combined: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20050526 ( most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). BOARD FINDINGS :...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01960
A left knee X-rayfor chronic left knee pain was normal. VASRD §4.71a specifies for 5003 that “satisfactory evidence of painful motion” constitutes limitations of motion and specifies application of a 10% rating “for each such major joint or group of minor joints affected by limitation of motion.” The left knee condition could not be reasonably rated higher than 10% using any exam proximate to separation or any alternate coding schema.While the VA exam is approximately 5 years remote from...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00260
Bilateral Knee Condition . All evidence considered, the Board recommends that each knee be separately adjudicated as unfitting, coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%. In the matter of the bilateral knee condition, the Board by a vote of 2:1 recommends that each joint be separately adjudicated as follows: an unfitting right knee condition coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%; and, an unfitting left knee condition coded 5299-5259 and rated 10%; both IAW VASRD §4.71a.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00076
The CI had excessive daytime sleepiness and was diagnosed with OSA requiring CPAP as noted above. Right Knee Condition . The 5 months after separation VA exam, demonstrated ‘tender patella tendon, tender patella rub, prominent tibial tubercle; no instability.’ History on both exams noted increased pain with activity, walking and standing, but did not indicate painful motion, or pain-limited motion of the knee.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002104C070206
In the applicant’s case the Board must consider whether the VA ratings for the applicant’s ankles, knees and back are combat related. At that time it was stated that the applicant’s back pain had been documented since 1977. Based on this chronological review of the treatment the applicant received for his VA rated disabilities, it is evident that the applicant submitted insufficient evidence to show: a. that his shoulder pain should be approved for CRSC.
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600722
Advised being assigned to the Weight Control Program as of 020207), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.020318: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (concerning unsatisfactory progress on weight control program. The factual basis for this recommendation was the Applicant’s diagnosis of Bilateral Quadriceps Tendonitis, failed to meet height and weight standards while on 2nd assignment to...
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 | CY2014 | PD-2014-02466
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain, Left Knee Secondary to Patella Alta & Patellar Tendon Injury5099-500310%Patella Alta Of The Left Knee (claimed as left knee to include degenerative left...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500954
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174D. I thought it would get...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00344
SEPARATION DATE: 20060405 Left Knee Condition . By the time of separation, the CI’s condition had improved such that he had a full ROM, albeit that knee pain persisted in spite of treatment.