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. 
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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 April 2009.  Starting in 2018, you were treated for a number of disability conditions including lumbago, right forearm strain, diverticulitis, and hypertension.  In each instance, you were released without limitations and returned to full duty status.  You were discharged on 18 July 2019 after your request for a hardship discharge was approved.  Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you a combined 100%. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list based on a number of service connected disability conditions rated by the VA.  You assert that you requested a hardship discharge due to your homelessness and were denied an opportunity for referral to the Disability Evaluation System.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. 
 
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 the preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service.  In particular, the Board examined your performance leading to your hardship discharge.  They noted that you performed well above fleet standards for your paygrade and rating in the months leading to your discharge from the Navy.  In addition, you were recommended for early promotion in the last two performance evaluations prior to your discharge.  This led the Board to concluded that you were capable of performing the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating despite the existence of any disability conditions.  Further the Board found no evidence your conditions were sufficiently serious to meet the other criteria for unfitness since you were always released without limitations and none of your medical providers referred you to the Disability Evaluation System.  In the Board’s opinion, you would have been medically fit to continue on active duty had you not requested to be discharged for a hardship.  Finally, the Board was not persuaded by your post-discharge VA ratings 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.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 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. 
 
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.   
 
Sincerely,