Docket No. 6638-20
Ref: Signature Date

Dear ,  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  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 insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2021.  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 opinions contained in Senior Medical Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 18 April 2021 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 29 April 2021; copies of which were previously provided to you for comment. 
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in October 2009.  On 2 November 2013, you were hospitalized for alcohol abuse and suicidal ideations.  Upon release from treatment, you were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder.  After reporting worsening of mental health symptoms, you were placed on limited duty on 3 February 2014.  This occurred despite you admission that you did not have suicidal ideations in November 2013.  Eventually, you were returned to full duty on 7 August 2014.  Shortly afterwards, you provided a statement to police authorities that you may have been sexually assaulted in October 2013 after a night of drinking alcohol.  In June 2017, you were again placed on limited duty.  However, on this occasion it was for Hypersomnia, Cervicalgia, and Sciatica.  In the following months, you were seen by mental health providers who concluded you suffered from an adjustment disorder and not Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  However, one medical provider diagnosed you with a nightmare disorder on 12 September 2017.  This diagnosis was changed back to adjustment disorder by a clinical psychologist on 20 September 2017.  In the meantime, you were discharged at the end of your obligated active duty service on 22 September 2017 and assigned a RE-1 reenlistment code.  In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for a number of service connected disability conditions including PTSD and Obstructive Sleep Apnea.   
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list for your PTSD.  You argue that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your discharge due to your condition.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinions in your case. 
 
In order to qualify for military disability benefits through the Disability Evaluation System with a finding of unfitness, a service member must be unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank, or rating as a result of a qualifying disability condition.  Alternatively, a member may be found unfit if their disability represents a decided medical risk to the health or the member or to the welfare or safety of other members; or the member’s disability imposes unreasonable requirements on the military to maintain or protect the member.  In your case, the Board concluded that the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that you were unfit based on any of the criteria for unfitness.  Specifically, the Board considered the multiple diagnoses you received from Navy medical providers.  None of the providers diagnosed you with PTSD or felt your disability conditions merited a referral to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  While the providers concluded your adjustment disorder was not compatible with continued naval service, none felt you were unfit for continued naval service due to a mental health condition.  In addition, as noted in the advisory opinion, your sleep disorder resulted in your limited duty status only for evaluation purposes and did not result in a referral to the PEB.  Further, the Board took into consideration your VA rating for PTSD but did not find it persuasive for two reasons.  First, 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.  Second, your Navy mental health providers documented your history of unreliability regarding your mental health symptoms.  In their opinion, you appeared to be seeking a PTSD diagnosis for monetary gain and questioned your reliability as a historian.  In light of the medical documentation in your record that questions your reliability and motives with regard to your mental health symptoms, the Board determined it adversely affected the weight that should be afforded to your VA PTSD diagnosis and rating since those are based primarily on your testimony.  Finally, the Board considered the character statements you provided but concluded that it was insufficient to overcome the aforementioned history of unreliability with regard to your mental health symptoms.  Based on these factors, the Board concluded you did not meet any of the criteria for unfitness for any disability condition including PTSD.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
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.   
 
Sincerely,   

8/17/21


Deputy Director