Dear  
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 7 January 2020.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  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.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Because your application was submitted with a new statement that was not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your most recent application.  In this regard, your current request was carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, on 12 March 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, available portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative reason for separation to disability.  You assert that your knee condition did not exist prior to entry on active duty and formed the basis for your administrative separation.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  First, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence supports the Navy’s determination that your osteoarthritis condition existed prior to your entry into the Navy.  The Board relied on the medical diagnosis of 27 July 2011 and the absence of evidence to contradict that diagnosis.  Second, the Board concluded that your knee condition did not qualify as a disability conditions since it did not prevent you from performing the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating.  This finding is substantiated by the medical decision by your provider not to refer you to a medical board.  The Board also relied on the 20 July 2011 medical report that documents that you were able to pass the mock Physical Readiness Test run despite your claim of knee pain.  Further, the Board relied on the 27 July 2011 medical report which documented your left knee pain at 2 out of 10.  In the Board’s opinion, this medical evidence supports the Navy’s determination that your knee pain interfered with your performance of duties but did not prevent you from performing them.  Accordingly, although your new contentions were not previously considered by the Board, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 
 
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.