DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket! No. 02085-08
25 Novenber 2008
This is in
reference to your application for correc
d pursuant to the provisions of title 10
es Code, section 1552.
naval recep
United Sta
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of
Records, sitting in executive session, considered y
application on 20 November 2008. Your allegations
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administ
regulations and procedures applicable to the procee
Board. Documentary material considered by the Boar
of your application,
support thereof, your naval record and applicable s
regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of th
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted
insufficient to establish the existence of probable
error or injustice.
The Board found that you served on active duty int
5 May 1966 to 1 May 1968. Although your record sho
were treated for a cut on your right foot during De
and for athletes foot-cellulitis of the right foot
January 1969, there is no indication in your record
sustained a shell fragment wound of your right foot
you contend. On 26 January 1991, the Department of
Affairs denied your request for service connection
of an alleged mortar wound of the right leg/foot be
together with all material subm
tion of your
of the
Naval
ur
f error and
ative
ings of this
consisted
itted in
tatutes,
e entire
was
material
he Navy from
ws that you
cember 1967,
during
that you
or leg as
Veterans
for residuals
Cause.
The Board was unable to conclude that you were woun
; ; oo. |
during your period of naval service. Accordingly, |
|
|
ded in action
your
application has been denied. The names and votes o
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are ent
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission o
material evidence or other matter not previously co
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep)
a presumption of regularity attaches to all officia
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to dem
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
£ the members
are such
ntled to have
£ new and
nsidered by
| in mind that
l records.
fficial
Pastrate the
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02400-07
02400-07 3 April 2008This 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 3 April 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00429
Examinations from May 2005 by a civilian neurologist show difficulty with right foot dorsiflexion, a lot of pain laterally on the leg from the knee down, especially on the foot with any tactile stimuli or with movement. The VA rated the CI’s disability under a peripheral neuropathy code but included the functional motor loss and therefore was not limited to rating the disability at the moderate level. The CI had motor weakness most likely due to pain documented on multiple examinations as...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 10_08_50 CDT 2000
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 1999. The officials who rated your condition were required to choose one of the three options under finding (9) in order to establish your basic eligibility for disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05070-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. The VA rated that condition at 30% by analogy to an un-repaired fistula, even though the fistual had been repaired. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05157-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2000. 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. You were wounded in action on 26 December 1968, and awarded the Purple Heart on 5 January 1969.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07263-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 1 November 2002. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08797-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA shortly after you were released from active duty is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because those ratings were assigned without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on 25 June 1985. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05464-06
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 were evaluated by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 18 January 2006...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00841-07
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03530-01
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. approved and you were transferred to the PDRL with a 50 percent disability rating on 16 September 1969. 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.