DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 05382-10
6 October 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 30
September 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 served on active duty in the Navy from 13 March 1974 to 10 March
1978, when you were honorably released from active duty. The
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a disability rating
of 0% for bronchitis effective 18 July 1991; 10% for a scar associated
with a right lower lobe segmentectomy associated with bronchitis
effective 7 March 2005; and 10% for costochondritis associated with
the scar. At various times between 18 March 1991 and 1 September 2006
the rating for bronchitis ranged between 0 and 100%, with the most
recent rating of record being 10% effective 1 September 2006.
The Board noted that the effective date of SECNAVINST 1850.45 is 30
April 2002, and that its provisions are inapplicable to your case.
The Board concluded that the possession of one or more conditions
that is normally cause for referral to the disability evaluation
system does not mandate that disability evaluation be initiated, or,
in those cases where the member is referred for disability
evaluation, require that the member be found unfit for duty by reason
of physical disability. As you have not demonstrated that, at the
time of your release from active duty, you were unfit to reasonably
perform your duties due to the effects of bronchitis, sinusitis,
pneumonia, bronchiecstasis, and/or any other condition, the Board
was unable to recommend that your record be corrected to show that
you were separated or retired by reason of physical disability.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06977-01
” The Board noted that it is the function of an MEB, which is composed entirely of physicians, to report on the state of health of the service member who is the subject of the MEB, and to recommend referral of the member to the PEB in appropriate cases. In reference to the question of why Petitioner's cardiac and pulmonary conditions found not unfitting at the time of his initial PEB adjudication and placement on the TDRL, reference Petitioner's original 14 February 1992 Medical Evaluation...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00104
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. |UNFITTING CONDITION |VASRD CODE |RATING | |Right Wrist, Tenosynovitis |5299-5215 |10% | |COMBINED |10% | ____________________________________________________________________________ __ The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20100109, w/atchs. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00630
Although no treatment record diagnosis of hypertension (HTN) was found in the records available to the Board, the MEB physical note indicated medication for blood pressure and the VA records indicated a diagnosis of HTN while in service in 2006 while on active duty. The Board deliberated what the CI’s HTN would rate under code 7101 (required for consideration in rating renal disease) and considered the evidence of likely in-service labile HTN, and that the VA HTN exam three months post...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00250
The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for continued Naval service, and separated at 10% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Naval and Department of Defense regulations. The CI had a previous Limited Duty (LIMDU) Board in October 2001 after a seven year history of low back pain. Therefore the CI’s back condition is rated using the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06378-06
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 on 26 September 2003, the Physical Evaluation Board determined that you were...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00270
This CI’s functional impairment at the time of separation warrants a 50% rating. Shoulder injury with left brachial plexus injury appears to have been unfitting at the time of separation. However, this condition was not unfitting at the time of separation and therefore no disability rating is applied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12112-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. 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. 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 | CY2010 | PD2010-00577
The FPEB noted the CI’s medication use and quarterly pulmonary evaluations, but stated that “due to his relatively high level of functionality, the Board opines that a 10% rating is appropriate.” This case focuses primarily on rating the CI’s unfitting condition IAW the VASRD alone, absent the specific DoDI 1332.39 criteria, in effect at the time. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. I have carefully...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00655
The CI’s left knee instability was documented multiple times in his service treatment record (STR) and NARSUM and continued after he separated from service. It is not possible to separate out pain symptoms due to patellofemoral pain syndrome and pain symptoms due to Cartilage, semilunar, removal of, symptomatic. The Board considered the condition of Anxiety Disorder--NOS and unanimously determined that this condition was not unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02771-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2010. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden -is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...