Dear   
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 December 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 6 November 2019, a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. 
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in November 1979.  You underwent two surgical clipping procedures in 1984 and 1989 before you were referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) by a medical board on 22 July 1993.  The PEB found you unfit for continued naval service due to history of intracerebral aneurysm times two status post clipping procedure on 24 August 1993.  You were also referred to the PEB for kidney disease but that condition was determined not to be unfitting.  You were assigned a 10% disability rating for your unfitting condition and discharged with severance pay on 12 December 1993 after accepting the PEB findings.  Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated your cerebral aneurysm at 10%.  Eventually, your VA rating for your aneurysm was increased to 30% in 1996. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list.  You assert that the incorrect ICD code was used by the PEB resulting in the assignment of an erroneous disability rating.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion contained in Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 6 November 2019.  Specifically, the Board determined that you were assigned a proper disability rating of 10% by the PEB and that the ICD Codes had no bearing on the PEB findings in your case.  The Board agreed with the advisory opinion that your 10% rating was appropriate for your unfitting condition based on the absence of significant symptoms or evidence of significant duty impairment.  The VA’s assignment of a 10% rating for the unfitting condition upon your discharge led the Board to conclude that the preponderance of the evidence supports the disability rating assigned by the PEB in your case.  While the Board considered the 1996 VA rating of 10%, it noted that the new rating was based on a physical examination that occurred almost two years post-discharge.  In the Board’s opinion, this examination occurred to distant in time from your discharge to be probative in determining whether the PEB erred in their findings.  Regarding your assertions that the incorrect ICD Codes were utilized in your case, the Board again agreed with the advisory opinion that these codes had no bearing on the PEB findings in your case and were utilized for statistical purposes only.  Accordingly, the Board determined insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record. 
 
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 matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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.