DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 3188-17 

AUG 2018 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions ofTitle 10 United States Code §1552. After careful and conscientious consideration 
of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the 
existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been 
denied. 

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 17 May 2018. The names and votes ofthe members of the panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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, relevant portions of your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory 
opinion contained in HQMC letter 1770 TSGLI dtd 13 March 2018 and your response to the 
opinion. 

A review ofyour record shows that on 24 May 2012, you were injured in a parachute training 
accident and sustained injuries to your left femur and right shoulder. Specifically, you suffered 
from an open femoral fracture of the left leg and a right shoulder labral (SLAP) tear in addition 
to an axillary nerve palsy to the right shoulder. You were treated at the hospital and discharged 
on 28 May 2012. Your hospitalization wits followed by routine physical therapy and additional 
treatments, to include an arthroscopic procedure due to adhesions on 7 September 2012. You 
subsequently filed a TSGLI claim for loss of ADLs on 24 July 2012. Specifically, your claim 
addressed your inability to independently bathe, dress, toilet, and transfer without physical 
assistance for over 60 days. Your request was denied on 24 October 2012 and your 
reconsideration request was denied on 1 May 2013. On 29 October 2013, your appeal was 
denied by the TSGLI Appeals Board, which concluded that there was a lack ofmedical evidence 
that specified your inability to independently perform your AD Ls. 

After reviewing all ofthe medical records and material submitted by you in support of your claim, 
and after resolving all doubt in your favor, the Board concluded that the evidence still does not 
support your claim that you required assistance to perform at least two activities of daily living for a 
period over 120 days. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments 
contained in the advisory opinion. When reviewing your request, the Board considered all ofthe 
evidence in light of the TSGLI Guidelines. While there is evidence that you received assistance in 
performing ADLs from your spouse, the preponderance ofthe evidence signaled that you did not 
require that a5sistance, as defined by the TSGLI Guidelines. Based on this finding by the Board, 
they concluded, regrettably, that you do not qualify for TSGLI payments. Accordingly, the 
Board was unable to find an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied 
your application. 

The Board carefully considered your argument that the previous review authorities ignored or 
unjustifiably discounted the statements you submitted in support of your claim. However, the 
Board did not concur with your contention. The Board felt that the most accurate and germane 
medical review was documented by the notes in the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal 
Technology Application (AHLTA), which included your treatment while hospitalized as well as 
your subsequent medical care during the weeks immediately following your injury. The Board 
highlighted that not only are these notes more proximate in time to the injury, but evaluated your 
capabilities to determine the level ofassistance that would be required while convalescing at 
home. · 

The. Board also considered the statements provided by you and your spouse, which state that 
your spouse assisted you with bathing, dressing, toileting, and transferring for over 120 days. 
Although these statements explain that you did receive assistance from your spouse, the Board 
was not convinced that such assistance was n;quired. The Board considered the statement 
provided by      , MSC, USN,     Marine Special Operations Battalion, US Marine 
Corps Forces,      , which states that the combination of the nonweight 
bearing status ofyour left leg and the strength loss in your right shoulder created a 
functional defieit, resulting in an inability to perform ADLs without physical and standby 
assistance. The Board also considered the statements submitted by , US Marine Corps 
Forces,      , and by        MS OTR/L, Licensed 
Occupational Therapist. The Board thoroughly reviewed the medical notes entered into AHLTA 
which covered the treatment provided at the time of your injury and in the subsequent months. 
The AHL TA notes dated 7 June 2013 state that you were "able to sit with no assistance" and that 
you "transfer[ed] safely from chair to exam table and back." On 13 June 2013, 
noted that "there does not appear to be any other home assistive needs at this time." By 10 July 
2013, you were authorized to "ween off the crutches at any time." After comparing the affidavits 
submitted in support of your claim with the notes captured by medical professionals more 
proximate in time to your injury, the Board decided to assign more weight to the treatment notes 
and subsequent medical reports issued within the weeks immediately following your trauma. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding ofthe issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence 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, 



Executive Director