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 relevant portions of your naval record and your application, 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2020.  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.  
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in September 1989.  You were treated after losing consciousness while on duty in November 1990 and after being struck in your head by a falling cabinet in February 1991.  You were later treated for headaches in September 1991 after hitting your head in the shower.  In the meantime, you were diagnosed with Bilateral Retropatellar Pain Syndrome of your knees that resulted in your placement on limited duty and eventual referral to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  Due to your knee conditions, the PEB found you unfit for continued naval service on 25 February 1992 and assigned you a 10% disability rating.  You were discharged on 16 March 1992 pursuant to your PEB findings with severance pay.  Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for your Retropatellar Pain Syndrome but concluded your headache disorder was not service connected. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list.  You assert that you were unfit for continued naval service due to several incidents of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) that were not rated by the PEB.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In order to be found unfit for continued naval service, a service member must be unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating due to a qualifying disability condition.  In your case, the Board noted your medical record documents several treatments for a head injury and headaches but concluded there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that you suffered from TBI or were sufficiently impaired to be unfit for continued naval service due to a head injury.   
 
The Board found that you were never diagnosed with TBI or placed on limited duty as a result of any head injury.  After the February 1991 incident, you were placed on light duty for three days before being returned to full duty.  Similarly, you were treated with medication in September 1991 after hitting your head in the shower.  The Board found no follow-up or limitations on your duty after the incident.  The lack of any TBI diagnosis nor extended duty limitations after your medical treatments led the Board to conclude the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service for TBI or any condition associated with a head injury.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice 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.