DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 11680-10
19 August 2011
ER
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 18
August 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.
In this regard, the Board was not persuaded that you experienced
Significant symptoms of fatigability, mental sluggishness and weight
gain, or muscular weakness, mental disturbance and weight gain that
would have warranted a rating of 30 or 60% for hypothyroidism.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes
of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Judge Advocate General of the Navy acts on behalf of the Secretary
of the Navy in providing departmental resolution of combat-related
Opinions. As you have not exhausted an available administrative
remedy by applying to the Judge Advocate General for a determination
that your condition of hypothyroidism is combat related, the Board
did not consider that portion of your application.
You should submit your request by letter addressed to the Judge
Advocate General of the Navy, Administrative Law Division, (Code 13),
1322 Patterson Avenue Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5066.
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. Inthis 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,
Ls Dans gh
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00034
MD00-00034 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991006, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Assessment: 1 - anxiety disorder vs. depression with somahzation, 2 - hypothyroidism, 3 - amenorrhea. On that same day she was counseled for failure to meet weight standards and placed on weight control.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06860-00
show that you were on the weight control program during the period 1 August 1976 through 31 July 1977. for the period ending 31 July states as follows: The next two fitness reports The fitness report (He) was placed on weight/personal appearance at-a starting weight of 210 pounds with a goal of to be achieved by 771027. years, 7 months and 21 days of active service. He continued to gain weight through While undergoing the physical This On 31 August 1980 the discharge directed on 20 April...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00213
Using an evaluation completed nine months after the time of separation from the Air Force, the Veterans Administration (VA) rated her disability as 6354 Chronic fatigue syndrome with upper airway resistance, angioedema, and vocal cord dysfunction at 20%. She did have one sleep study done in June 2001 that had no evidence of UARS but the literature states that patients with UARS usually have more subtle changes in breathing and do not usually have apnea. I have carefully reviewed the...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01926
The “bipolar II disorder” was the only condition forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123.The Informal PEB adjudicated “bipolar II disorder…mild”as unfitting, rated 10%, citing application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). 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 (VASRD) standards to...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02672
The MEB also identified and forwarded three other conditions.The InformalPEBadjudicated hypothyroidism to include arthralgia, and bilateral plantar fasciitis as unfitting, rated 10%, and 0% respectfullywith application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). 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 (VASRD)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05569-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2007-072
He stated that his health and weight loss records clearly prove that if his condition had been timely diagnosed and treated, he would have been in compliance with the Coast Guard’s fitness standards in time to be advanced on September 1, 2006. He alleged that it should be removed because (a) Dr. R told him that, because of his PTSD and medications, a weight-loss program “would be detrimental to my recovery”; (b) two of his PTSD medications, Effexor and Nortrip- tyline, caused his weight...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-01974
The applicant contends that his hypothyroidism caused him to gain weight while on active duty which resulted in his demotion. While his failure to maintain Air Force weight standards was the basis for his demotion, records indicate new weight baselines were frequently established and only after repeated failures did the commander initiate demotion action. Exhibit B.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00664 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 2012. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...