DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 06501-10
15 April 2011
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 April
2011. 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 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) considered your case by formal
hearing on 12 January 1994 and determined that you were unfit for
duty by reason of physical disability due to degenerative arthritis
of your right shoulder and degenerative spinal disc disease, rated
at 0 and 20% respectively. The PEB also determined that your bilateral
carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) was not unfitting or ratable. You were
discharged by reason of physical disability on 22 March 1994 with
entitlement: to disability severance pay. Effective 23 March 1994,
the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability
ratings of 20% for the spinal disc eondition, 10% fer CTS of each
wrist, 50% for a total hysterectomy with removal of ovaries and
fallopian tubes, and 0% for two other conditions. Your combined VA
rating was 70% effective 23 March 1994.
The Board concluded that your receipt of a combined rating of 70%
from the VA effective the day following your discharge is not
probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record.
In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned that rating
without regard to the issue of your fitness for duty as to the
bilateral the carpal tunnel syndrome and total hysterectomy.
Although the VA must’ rate all conditions it classifies as “service
connected”, that is, incurred in, aggravated by, or merely traceable
to a period of military service, the military departments rate only
those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty at the
time of separation or contribute to an unfitting condition and
warrant a separate rating. You have not demonstrated that the CTS
or hysterectomy rendered you unfit to reasonably perform your duties
at the time of your discharge. The Board noted that in a rating
decision dated 27 November 2000, VA rating officials concluded that
there was no evidence that your hysterectomy affected your ability
to maintain employment.
In view of the foregoing, 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,
Deans
W. DEAN PFRYF
Executive Director
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02479
No other conditionwas submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB (IPEB)adjudicated “bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome”as unfitting, rated 10% and 10% for a combined 20% rating, citing application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Bilateral CTS .The first note in the service treatment record was an electrodiagnostic study dated 29 August 2003, which was performed for the CI’s history of bilateral hand pain, tingling and numbness without neck pain. At an orthopedic...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02664
The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic LBP with degenerative disc disease (DDD) at L5-S1” as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). My rating was for Chronic Low back pain with Degenerative disc Disease at L5-S1, what was not included but could be condition for being unfit. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00028
The medical basis for the separation was bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and low back pain (LBP). Regarding the CTS, IAW VASRD §4.124a discussed above, a 10% rating for each wrist is indicated. A 20% rating, deferring to the very proximal VA rating was considered.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00005
After two periods of limited duty(LIMDU) the case sent to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) that found the bilateral CTS to be medically unacceptable and as forwarded it to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E.The MEB also forwarded a right shoulder condition for PEB adjudication. Neurological exam was normal. After a thorough review of the treatment record, the Board determined that the CI’s left and right wrist conditionswere essentially non-compensable based solely...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00259
SUMMARY OF CASE : This covered individual (CI) was a junior officer medically separated from the Army in 2005, after 18 months of service, for a cervical condition. The VA rating examination was performed 2 months later (still prior to separation), and demonstrated normal ROM in all planes. In the matter of the cervical condition, although there was a significant disparity between the Army and VA examinations, it was concluded that, IAW VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the rating should be...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03788
The narrative summary (NARSUM), dated 31 May 2002 (3 months prior to separation), documented persistent left-sided neck and LUE pain (rated 8/10, “moderate and constant”); there was no mention of sensory symptoms, but “some clumsiness in the [LUE].” As with the VA exam, no physical limitations or functional consequences were elaborated. The evidence likewise supported a conclusion that the ROM limitation was fairly characterized as moderate, and the intermittently normal ROM (as documented...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02650
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Finally, the Board considered whether additional rating could be recommended under a peripheral nerve code for the associated radiculopathies in evidence at separation. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00459
After the surgery she gradually improved but still had persistent recurrent flare-ups of severe spasm and pain of the left upper back, left posterior neck that radiated to her left occiput and down her left arm. The Board considered the following conditions and unanimously concluded that none should be considered unfitting: Left Upper Extremity Radiculopathy; Lumbosacral Spine, Degenerative Joint and Disc Disease; S/P Hysterectomy; S/P Cholecystectomy; Postoperative Scar, Anterior Cervical...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00454
The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. At the pre-separation C&P exam, no pain in the left foot at rest and a normal gait were recorded. The Board, therefore, has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating.
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.