DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7029-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO FORMER USMC Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 (b) Senior Medical Advisor CORB letter 5220 CORB: 002 of 27 May 2021 (c) Director CORB letter 5220 CORB: 001 of 10 June 2021 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that her naval record be corrected to change her narrative reason for separation to disability. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 26 August 2021, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of the naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. Petitioner entered active duty with the Marine Corps in September 2016. She suffered a shoulder dislocation in November 2018 but recovered sufficiently to continue on active duty. After being meritoriously promoted to E-5 in February 2019, Petitioner asserts she suffered trauma after witnessing drone strikes while participating in Operation Inherent Resolve in Kuwait. Despite her trauma, Petitioner continued her superior performance and was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal in November 2019. However, she was eventually diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and recommended for administrative separation for condition not a disability. Her last fitness report documented that she passed both the Physical Fitness Test and Combat Fitness Test during her rating period and earned a ranking as a “highly qualified” Marine ahead of 60 other Marines in her peer group. After being medically cleared to separate from active duty on 3 June 2020, Petitioner was discharged on 24 August 2020 with a General characterization of service. Post-discharge, Petitioner was inducted into the Honor Society on 29 September 2020. c. In references (b) and (c), the office having cognizance over Petitioner’s request to determined that the evidence does not support finding Petitioner unfit for continued naval service at the time of her discharge or changing her narrative reason for separation to disability. The opinion pointed out that none of Petitioner’s medical providers felt her symptoms merited a referral to the Disability Evaluation System and that “the submitted evidence provides insufficient support for a finding of unfit for any of the petitioned conditions, either individually or collectively or through combined effect at discharge at this point.” Petitioner was previously provided a copy of references (b) and (c) for comment. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting partial relief. Specifically, the Board determined Petitioner deserves an upgrade to her characterization of service to Honorable. Petitioner’s military record documents her superior performance during her entire period active duty service. The Board found no negative counselings or evidence that her performance was nothing short of outstanding leading up to her release from active duty. As discussed earlier, Petitioner was meritoriously promoted in 2019, earned a Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, and was ranked ahead of 60 other Marines in her peer group less than five months prior to her discharge from the Marine Corps. In the Board’s opinion, the preponderance of the evidence supports granting her an Honorable characterization of service vice a General. Despite the Board’s recommendation to upgrade Petitioner’s characterization of service, they concluded that her narrative reason for separation remains appropriate and should not be changed. In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with references (b) and (c). 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 Petitioner’s case, the same evidence that documented her outstanding performance led the Board to conclude the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that she met any of the criteria for unfitness. In the Board’s opinion, despite evidence that she suffered from an adjustment disorder and may have possessed other disability conditions, Petitioner was performing her duties as a Marine E-5 well above fleet standards just prior to her discharge. Further, the Board noted Petitioner was medically cleared to be released from active duty. The Manual of the Medical Department Chapter 15-20 requires separation examinations and evaluations for active duty members and states “comprehensive evaluations are conducted for the purposes of ensuring that Service members have not developed any medical conditions while in receipt of base pay that might constitute a disability that should be processed by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and to ensure Servicemembers are physically qualified for recall to additional periods of active duty. Thus, the standards for being physically qualified to separate are the same as those being qualified to continue active duty Service … .” Therefore, based on the fact Petitioner was performing well in her duties and medically cleared for separation, the Board concluded insufficient evidence exits to find her unfit for continued naval service or change her narrative reason for separation to disability. RECOMMENDATION In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by changing Petitioner’s characterization of service to Honorable vice General under Honorable Conditions. Petitioner will be issued a new DD Form 214 that reflects this change. No other change to her record is required. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 8/30/2021