DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 05692-08
10 June 2009
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 Navai
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 June 2009. 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 enlisted on 30 November 1967. You
sustained a wound to your right, dominant hand on 19 September
1968. While home on convalescent leave during December 1968, a
pravate.osteopathic physician examined—you-and stated that he
believed you would be able to return to full duty not to include
combat duty. On 28 March 1969, the Physical Evaluation Board
(PEB} found you unfit for duty by reason of ankylosis of the
right middle finger, which it rated at 10% under Veterans
Administration (VA) code 5226. A letter dated 1 April 1969 from
the Senior Member, PEB, Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, to your
battalion commander, indicates that you accepted the findings of
the PEB, and that you signed a statement that you did not demand
a “full and fair” (oral) hearing. You were placed in a home
awaiting orders status on that date, and acknowledged that you
would be separated or retired by reason of physical disability
upon the completion of final action on your disability
proceedings. On 7 May 1969, the Physical Review Council
determined that you were fit for duty, and referred your case
back to the PEB for appropriate action. On 23 May 1969, the PEB
confirmed the finding of unfitness and previous rating of 10%,
and added a 10% rating under VA code 7804 for a painful scar,
right thumb. The revised findings were approved by the PRC on
10 June 1969, and you were discharged with entitlement to
disability severance pay on 27 June 1969.
The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the
effect that you were not advised of your “rights and options”
prior to your discharge. As noted above, you accepted the
initial findings of the PEB, waived your right to a hearing, and
acknowledged that you would be separated or retired by reason of
physical disability. Accordingly, as you have not demonstrated
_ that you were entitled to a combined disability rating of 30% or
higher from the Department of the Navy, 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,
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00602-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. The MEB established final diagnoses of metatarsalgia and gastroc equinus and recommended that your case be reviewed by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). The Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for eight conditions that were not rated by the PEB is not considered probative of the existence of error or...
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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03762-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The medical board recommended that your case be considered by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). 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 | CY2010 | 04787-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09901-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01495-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11594-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. the Board. 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 | CY2008 | 04018-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA effective the day after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07831-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 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. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...