Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00841-07
Original file (00841-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




 JRE
 Docket No. 00841-07
 11 January 2008


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. You requested, in effect, that your record be corrected to show that you were discharged by reason of physical disability due to unfitting conditions of your feet.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 January 2008. 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 Board found that you served on active duty in the Navy from 7 September 2001 to 20 September 2006, when you were honorably discharged because of you failure to meet physical standards. You were approximately six feet tall and weighed in excess of 240 lbs. on the date of discharge. On 5 January 2007, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) granted you service connection and a 10% disability rating for ringing in your ears, and denied your request for service connection and disability compensation for eight other claimed disabilities. The VA denied your request f or service connection for plantar fasciitjs, pes planus and associated foot pain because the VA examiner could not find any pathology upon which to base a ratable diagnosis.
Although you suffered from foot pain while serving in the Navy, there is no evidence that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your rate by reason of physical disability. In addition, the Board rejected you unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you would have met prescribed physical standards if you had received proper treatment of your painful feet. 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,


W. DEAN PFIEFFER
                   Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06153-05

    Original file (06153-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 you underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 23 June 2001 and were...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09

    Original file (07721-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11339-08

    Original file (11339-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02662

    Original file (PD-2013-02662.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Service IPEB – Dated 20070413VA - (3 days Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Foot Pain (Right & Left foot separately rated 10% each)528420%Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01176

    Original file (PD2010-01176.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the chronic right foot pain due to Morton’s neuroma condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Although there were examination findings of hallux valgus and hammer toes (single toes) there were no symptoms or impairment attributed to these abnormalities that would warrant rating under VASRD codes 5280 or 5282, and, if rated using these codes, would not attain a minimum...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02205

    Original file (PD-2014-02205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was profiled and permitted to take the Army physical fitness test, alternate aerobic portion.He was issued a permanent L3 profileand referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).The skin condition (hypertrophic scar)was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.The MEB also forwarded four other conditions (see rating comparison chart below), all judged to meet retention standards.The Informal PEB found the hypertrophic scar on the left foot unfitting and rated it...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013428

    Original file (20090013428.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides, in support of his application, a self-authored statement, PEB and Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD) Proceedings, deployment orders, separation orders, his discharge document, and VA medical records and rating decision. c. Based on a review of the medical evidence of record the PEB found the applicant physically unfit, recommended a combined rating of 20%, and separation with severance pay, if otherwise qualified. c. On 14 August 2007 an informal PEB found the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00925

    Original file (PD2010-00925.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Hammer Toe Deformities52820%Bilateral Pes Planus w/ Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis S/P Bilateral Hammer Toe Repair of 2 nd , 3 rd and 4 th Toes527610%20070103Moderate Flat FootCat II↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓Thoracolumbar Strain; DDD L5-S1523720%20070103Right Shoulder Strain5299- 502410%20070103Left Shoulder Strain5299-502410%20070103GERD and Hiatal Hernia734610%20070103Tinnitus626010%200701030% x 2 / Not Service Connected x 120070103...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00074

    Original file (PD-2014-00074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Metatarsalgia, Bilateral…527910%Bilateral Metatarsalgia…5276-527910%20071212GERDNot UnfittingEsophageal Reflux7399-73460%Other x0Other x6 RATING: 10%RATING: 10% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00629

    Original file (PD2011-00629.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI underwent three complex surgeries to correct the bilateral ankle pathology, however, he continued with pain stiffness and limited motion in both ankles and feet. 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. 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.