DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
					BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
							 2 NAVY ANNEX
						WASHINGTON DC 20370~5I 00

JRE
Docket No. 06378-06
2 July 2007

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 Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2007. 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 on 26 September 2003, the Physical Evaluation Board determined that you were unfit for duty by reason of left sural nerve entrapment, which it rated at 20% under Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) code 8623. You rejected that finding, and demanded a formal hearing, at which you that you be assigned ratings for a scar on your left ankle, and an injury to a lingual nerve. The hearing panel of the PEE confirmed the 20% rating under VA code 8623, and declined to rate the scar and lingual nerve injury. On 22 January 2004, the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards, denied your request for relief from final action of the PEE. You were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay effective 29 February 2004. On 1 May 2006, the VA awarded you a 30% rating for the injury to the lingual nerve, 20% for sural nerve entrapment syndrome, and 0% for a left ankle scar.

The Board concluded that the rating action taken by the VA on 1 May 2006 is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your case. In this regard, it noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. As you have not demonstrated that the lingual nerve injury and ankle scar were unfitting conditions, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director