DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
EGA
Docket No: 5683-14
6 July 2015
Oo. aia,
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 26 June 2015. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. You requested reinstatement to the
Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) after you were
administratively removed in January 2014. You stated that you
never received any medical evaluations or information on the
follow-up steps for periodic examinations while assigned to the
TDRL. However, SECNAVINST 1850.4E requires servicemembers
placed on TDRL to attend all required medical evaluations and to
“keep CHNAVPERS, CMC (MMSR-4), and the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service (DFAS) Cleveland Center apprised of their
current address.” The instruction warns that a failure to do
so, either willfully or through negligence, may result in the
suspension of disability retired pay and will be considered as
showing intent on the servicemember's part to abandon benefits.
You stated that you were dropped from the TDRL in August 2013,
but your records show that you remained on the TDRL until
15 January 2014, when you were administratively removed for
rrr
failure to report for required evaluations. The Board did not
have any evidence to support an error or injustice that would
require your reinstatement to the TDRL. It felt you failed to
meet your obligation to ensure compliance with SECNAVINST
1850.4E, while continuing to receive the maximum benefit of
5 years on the TDRL and ongoing treatment from the Department of
veterans Affairs (VA). As a result, the Board felt that you
were appropriately removed from the TDRL. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
Tr 45 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 within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
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 dorrection of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
OBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04738-01
The Petitioner appears to have suffered clinically from a Schizoid Personality Disorder since childhood, Paranoid Schizophrenia approximately eight years after his administrative separation from the Navy via a Board of Medical Survey. was admitted to Navy station Hospital tarily had not talked or moved secondary to not wanting #3002. and that the best diagnosis for his difficulties at this time is that of bipolar disorder, mixed type.” Dr. Plattner also noted that the veteran is “severely...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01031
Although the 40% rating was not supported by the evidence of the service treatment record, the PEB placed the CI on the TDRL with a rating of 40%. The PEB concluded the diabetes unfitting for continued military service and adjudicated a permanent 20% rating. Both at the time of placement on the TDRL and at the time of permanent disability disposition and removal from the TDRL, the CI’s diabetes was treated with diet and medication (an oral medication and insulin) meeting the VASRD criteria...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07024-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show that his name was not removed from the Temporary Disability Retired List and that he was not discharged from the Marine Corps. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Clemmons, Neuschafer and Silberman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 28 April 2011 and, pursuant to its...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09780-06
A three-member pan~1 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2006. The member’s medical record and service record were not available for review.After careful review of all the available evidence and based on unanimous opinion, the Formal PEB finds the member is unfit for continued naval service because of physical disability due to BRONCHIAL ASTHMA. He expressed his belief that had he not done so his condition...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00622
VASRD criteria for rating epilepsy are based on the frequency of major or minor seizures. At the time of the October 31, 2005 Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, approximately six months before TDRL reevaluation in 2006, the CI reported experiencing four seizures: one seizure in April 2004, May 2004, October 20, 2004, and in early January 2005, with no seizures between January 2005 and the VA C&P examination. The Board must determine the most appropriate fit with VASRD §4.124a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, desire to be restored to paygrade E-5, and assertion that your diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) contributed to your misconduct while on active duty. Consequently, when applying for a...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00663
Although the pulmonary scans and pulmonary hypertension were improving, the CI had continued shortness of breath and had a diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic disease. The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated primary hypercoagulable state, on lifelong anticoagulation condition as unfitting (with contributing category II chronic thromboembolic disease and venous stasis) and the CI was rated at 40% and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). Exhibit C. Department of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06267-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In the absence of evidence that demonstrates that your and that your failure to do so might I name was removed from the TDRL erroneously, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04130-04
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. Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE 4. Hence, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it does not appear that petitioner’s Migraine Headaches were due to the Seizure condition for which he was determined to have been unfit by the PEB.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. 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...