DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 442-16 OCT 17 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 ofthe Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2016. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 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 entered active duty with the Marine Corps in December 2002. You deployed three times to Iraq between March 2003 and March 2006 where you sustained a gunshot wound and earned a Purple Heart. On 4 October 2006, you were medically cleared to separate from the Marine Corps. You were discharged from active duty on 1 December 2006 at the end ofyour obligated active service and issued a reentry code of RE-1 A. Subsequent to your discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for residual gunshot wound scar (20%), bi-lateral knee instability (20%), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (100%), residual muscle injury post gunshot wound (30%), lumbar spine strain (20%), post-vein graft (0%), bi-lateral degenerative knee joint disease (20%), left ankle strain (10%), and degenerative changes to left index finger (10%). The Board carefully considered your arguments that you should have been referred to a medical evaluation board due to your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and residual gunshot wounds. You assert that the seriousness of your conditions is substantiated by your VA disability ratings. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. The Board noted that your medical records show that you were treated for PTSD since your 2004 deployment that resulted in your gunshot wound. Despite suffering these injuries, you successfully completed another combat deployment from September 2005 through March 2006. Upon your return, you completed a July 2014 Post-Deployment Health Reassessment that stated that your health was good and about the same prior to deployment. A medical review ofyour conditions determined that your symptoms were mild at the time and did not require a treatment referral. After your July health assessment, you were again medically reviewed by another provider who concurred with the previous assessment that your conditions, while they existed, did not warrant a referral to a medical board. Consistent with these medical determinations, you were declared medically fit to reenlist in the Marine Corps. These factors convinced the Board that you were not unfit for continued naval service at the time of your discharge despite the VA's decision to rate you for multiple service connected disabilities. It is worth noting that the mere presence of a medical condition or specific correspondence of any manifestations thereof to an entry indicating a disability rating contained in the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities is insufficient to warrant either a finding of unfitness for continued naval service or a specific disability rating by the Physical Evaluation Board in the absence of demonstrated duty performance impairment ofsufficient magnitude as to render a Service member unfit for continued naval service. By contrast, 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. In your case, there was no medical determination or other evidence that you were unable to perform your duties while on active duty. By all indications, you were able to continue to perform your duties well despite the existence of your various disabilities. 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 of the panel will be furnished upon request. In regard to your request for a personal appearance, be advised that the Board regulations state personal appearances before the Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board determines that such an appearance will serve some useful purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of the record. It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew evidence within one year from the date ofthe 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director