DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 00290-10
25 October 2010
[ee
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
October 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 on 7 September 2001. You underwent a
pre-separation physical examination on 23 October 2006, and
disclosed an extensive medical history at that time; however, none
of the conditions your reported were considered disqualifying for
service. You were released from active duty and discharged on 6
December 2006.
Effective 7 December 2006, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
awarded you separate disability ratings of 10% for bilateral
flatfoot, left shoulder chronic tendonitis, tinnitus, and retrograde
amnesia, for a combined rating of 30%. You underwent a pre-enlistment
physical examination on 1 February 2007 and were found physically
qualified. You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 15 February 2007. On
4 September 2007, you completed a Report of Medical History in
connection with your impending deployment in which you specifically
denied having applied for a pension or compensation for a disability.
You reported that you had minor pain in your joints but no loss of
function or limitations, and that you had sustained a blast injury.
You indicated that you had been found fit for full duty prior to your
discharge from the Navy after recovering from the blast injury, and
again upon your return to the Navy Reserve, and that you had no
.residual medical issues. You were found fit for full duty, deployable
world-wide, and without limitations or medical complaints on 4
September 2007. You entered on active duty on that date. Your
entitlement to VA disability compensation was suspended for the
period of your mobilization. You completed a DD Form 2796 on 28 August
2008 in which you described your health as very good, and denied
having any medical or dental problems that had developed during your
deployment. In addition, you denied planning to seek counseling or
care for your mental health, and indicated that you did not have
concerns about possible exposures or events that occurred during the
deployment that you felt might affect your mental health. You were
found fit for demobilization on 28 August 2008 and released from
active duty on 2 October 2008. You were assigned a reentry code of
RE-1, to indicate that you were qualified and recommended for further
service.
On 1 January 2009, the VA reinstated the disability ratings that it
had suspended for the period of mobilization. The VA confirmed your
combined disability rating of 30% on 28 April 2009. You were
discharged from the Navy Reserve on 27 May 2009 by reason of physical
fitness assessment failure.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not
physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008,
or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on
27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness
assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any 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, P
lo. Noane
W. EAN PFE
Executive Daredt
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001757
The "Findings of facts" is a summary of the applicant's military service, a discussion of his January 2006 DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), his service in the ARNG and post-active duty medical history, the Army's procedure on releasing him from active duty, and a discussion of the Army Personnel Policy Guidance. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026423
Counsel requests the applicant's records be corrected to show he was released from active duty and medically retired due to a physical disability. The applicant's service medical records show he sustained an injury to his left shoulder on 9 October 2005 when a vehicle in which he was riding was hit by an IED. Not withstanding the ARNG opinion that the applicant's medical records should be referred to an MEB/PEB there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant's shoulder condition would...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002819
Medical records provided by the applicant indicate he was wounded during a mortar attack on 9 April 2004 in Iraq. Throughout his medical record there is no discussion of an MEB while he was serving on active duty. The applicant provided a letter from an Air Force neurologist, dated 5 February 2010 (1 month after his separation), stating the applicant should be reinstated on active duty to perform an MEB.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016672
He was honorably REFRAD on 31 May 2006 to the control of his State ARNG by reason of completion of his required active service in accordance with AR 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations). Most if not all of the applicant's medical records during his active duty service from 6 December 2004 to 31 May 2006 are not available for review with this case. Most of the applicant's medical records during this period of service are not available for review with this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04094-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. 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 VA rating officials who made that award found no objective evidence in your naval health record that was pertinent to your claim, and they...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01106
The Board notes that the reflex and motor exam were normal on the MEB evaluation and that sensation was altered only for the right hand. The CI reported back pain following neck surgery. There was no additional VA conditions, but the Board notes that the VA determined the hearing loss, heart condition, TBI and sleep conditions to not be service-connected and that the heartburn was rated at 0% disability.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009433
On 20 October 2008, the applicant's immediate commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of paragraph 14-12(c) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) for misconduct – commission of serious offenses. The commander cited the following specific reasons and recommended a general discharge under honorable conditions: * willful disobedience of a lawful order (three times) * failure to report...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021337
* He provided a profile that shows his physical limitation * He has no documentation to show he followed up with a civilian physical about physical abnormalities d. page 5 (Discussion and Conclusions), paragraph number 4 that "The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated." There is no evidence in his service records and he provides insufficient evidence to show that at the time of his release from active duty that...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00853
The core DES file consists of the MEB referral document, the PEB adjudication document, the NARSUM (including any addendums or referenced examinations), the MEB physical exam, the commander’s statement, the physical profile(s), and any written appeals or internal DES correspondence. Although 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, there was no evidence for concluding that PTSD or any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021096
Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. The applicant contends his records should be corrected to show he was medically retired by reason of physical disability upon his release from active duty in...