DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
Docket No. 269-16 
OCT 03 2016 

Dear , 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. 

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 for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 8 September 2016. Your allegations oferror 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, your naval record and applicable statutes, 
regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve in June 2003. On 
September 2005, you were deployed to Iraq for approximately five months before being released 
from active duty on 10 April 2006. On 21 December 2006, your command requested a medical 
determination on your retention qualifications from BUMED based on your diagnosed PostTraumatic 
Stress Disorder (PTSD) condition. BUMED determined you were not physically 
qualified for retention and Commander, Marine Forces Reserve directed your administrative 
separation. You chose not to seek a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) review of your NPQ status 
and were discharged on 12 March 2008. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you should have been referred to a medical 
board for your PTSD condition. You assert that your PTSD condition warrants your placement 
on the Permanent Disability Retirement List. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your 
rationale for relief. The Board was not convinced that your PTSD condition warranted referral to 
a medical board. In order to qualify for a disability retirement, a service member must be unfit to 
perform the duties ofoffice, grade, rank or rating because ofdisease or injury incurred or 
aggravated while entitled to basic pay. Each case is considered by relating the nature and degree 
of physical disability of the member to the requirements and duties that member may reasonably 
be expected to perform in his or her office, grade, rank or rating. So the mere presence of a 
medical condition or specific correspondence ofany manifestations thereof to an entry indicating 
a disability rating contained in the Department ofVeterans Affairs (VA) Schedule for Rating 

Disabilities is insufficient to warrant either a finding ofunfitness for continued naval service or a 
specific disability rating by the PEB. In your case, the medical determination by your command 
was that your condition did not warrant a referral to a medical board. In their opinion, while 
your condition disqualified you from being world-wide deployable, it did not create a severe 
enough occupational impairment to warrant a line of duty determination or a medical board. 
Without evidence to contradict this finding by your command, the Board felt insufficient 
evidence exists to overturn their determination. You provided evidence in the form ofwitness 
statements and VA findings, however, none of these convinced the Board that you suffered a 
significant occupational impairment to warrant referral to the disability evaluation system. 
Eligibility for compensation and pension disability ratings by the VA is tied to the establishment 
ofservice connection and is manifestation-based without a requirement that unfitness for military 
duty be demonstrated and your letters in support ofyour VA compensation also did not directly 
address your fitness for continued naval service. Accordingly, the Board was unable to find an 
error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied your application. The names 
and votes. ofthe members ofthe panel will be furnished upon request. 

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 evidence 
within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously 
considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it is important to 
keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity 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, 

Executive Director