DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTQN, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 5825-16 
JUN 0 5 2017 

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 ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 11 May 2017. 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, 
regulations and policies. The Board also considered the advisory opinion contained in Director, 
Secretary of the Navy Council ofReview Boards letter 5220 CORB: 002 of3 March 2017; a 
copy ofwhich was provided to you for comment. 

A review ofyour record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in May 2001. 
You served on active duty until 28 May 2005 when you were discharged and transferred to the 
Marine Corps Reserve. On 6 July 2005, you were activated and recalled to active duty until 31 
May 2006. Subsequent to your release from active duty, the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(VA) rated you for a number service connected disabilities including sleep apnea. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the Permanent 
Disability Retirement List based on your VA disability rating. Unfortunately, the Board 
disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the Board substantially 
concurred with the advisory opinion contained in Director, Secretary ofthe Navy Council of 
Review Boards letter 5220 CORB: 002 of3 March 2017. Specifically, the Board was unable to 
find evidence to support a finding ofunfitness for continued naval service at the time ofyour 
release from active duty. The Board noted that you were seen by medical for your separation 
physical on 25 March 2005 and cleared for separation despite the existence ofa sleep apnea 
condition. At that time, no other conditions were documented as potential disabilities. The 
severity of your sleep apnea condition and its impact on your fitness for duty was considered 
mild, at best, since you were subsequently brought back onto active duty in approximately one 
month despite the existence ofyour condition. On 2 May 2006, you were again medically 
cleared for separation despite the existence ofyour sleep apnea condition. Again, the Board 
noticed that no additional disqualifying disability conditions were noted in your separation 
physical. These facts taken in total convinced the Board insufficient evidence exists to support a 
finding that you were unfit for continued naval service at the times you were released from active 
duty. The fact the VA later determined you suffered from service connected disabilities was 
determined not to be probative to the issue ofunfitness for duty 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 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. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
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 ofan official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director