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 24 September 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 October 2010. You served through the completion of your required active duty without incident and were discharged on 5 October 2014 with a RE-1 reenlistment code. Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for a number of disability conditions including right shoulder strain, left shoulder strain, hypertension, migraine headaches, left wrist strain, tinnitus, lumbosacral strain, radiculopathy, right lower extremity, radiculopathy, left lower extremity, adjustment disorder with depressed mood, right wrist strain, bilateral gout feet, gastroesophageal reflux disease, sleep apnea with asthma, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder with unspecified depressive disorder, and five conditions rated at 0%. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative reason for separation to disability with back pay and compensation. You allege that your discharge was unfair and procedurally defective since you were unfit for continued naval service at the time. You assert that you suffered from multiple incidents of harassment and sexual assault. Finally, you provided medical records of your various treatments while on active duty. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In order for a service member to be unfit for continued naval service, the 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 examined your performance record leading up to your release from active duty to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to support such a finding. Your record shows that you earned a 3.33 trait average in your last E-3 evaluation prior to your promotion to E4. Subsequently, your performance evaluations shows your performance regressed due to military bearing and failure to follow instructions. As a result, you were assigned a 2.50 trait average for your performance evaluation ending on 15 June 2013. However, in the following 16 months, your performance improved significantly. On your 15 June 2014 performance evaluation, you earned a 2.67 trait average and a “progressing” recommendation for promotion. Approximately four months later, your performance improved to the point you earned a 3.0 trait average and a recommendation for promotion. In addition, you were recommended for retention in the Navy based on your performance. When evaluating this evidence with regard to whether you were unfit for continued naval service, the Board found evidence that you were performing at fleet standards at the time of your discharge and eligible to reenlist without any restrictions. The Board concluded this was strong evidence that you were capable of performing the duties of your office, grade, rank, or rating since your performance was continuously trending upwards as you approached the end of your obligated active service. The Board also considered the medical evidence that documented your treatment for multiple symptoms and conditions while on active duty. In reviewing these records, the Board noted that you were treated and released without limitations. None of your medical providers felt your conditions or symptoms warranted a duty restriction, placement on limited duty, or referral to the Physical Evaluation Board. Since referral to the disability evaluation system is primarily a medically driven process, the Board determined insufficient evidence exists to support a finding that you were unfit. Additionally, the Board concluded your medical and performance records support the unrestricted reenlistment code assigned to your upon your discharge. Similarly, the Board did not find the VA ratings evidence probative on the issue of unfitness since eligibility for compensation and pension disability ratings by the VA is tied to the establishment of service connection and is manifestation-based without a requirement that unfitness for military duty be demonstrated. As explained earlier, the Board found substantial evidence that your performance significantly improved over your last months of active duty despite the existence of your disability conditions. Finally, the Board concluded that no injustice exists in your case. The Board noted that you were eligible for reenlistment in the Navy based on your assigned reenlistment code. Therefore, you chose to leave the Navy on your own accord vice being involuntarily separated. In the Board’s opinion, when considered with the previous findings that you were, more likely than not, fit for active duty, there was no injustice in your assigned narrative reason for separation from the Navy. The Board found no evidence of that your discharge was unfair or procedurally defective. 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.