DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No. 1593-17 
APR 02 2018 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that 
conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were 
previously denied relief by the Board on 16 February 2016. 

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 15 March 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
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. Additionally, the Board considered the advisory 
opinions contained in Senior Medical Advisor ltr 1910 CORB: 002 of23 Jan 2018 and Director 
CORB ltr 1910 CORB: 001 of26 Jan 2018 along with the evidence you submitted in rebuttal. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability 
retirement list. You assert that you were improperly discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve 
despite suffering from a lumbar disability and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 
Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the 
Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinions contained in Senior Medical Advisor 
ltr 1910 CORB: 002 of23 Jan 2018 and Director CORB ltr 1910 CORB: 001 of26 Jan 2018. 
Specifically, the Board felt the evidence did not find that you were unfit for continued naval 
service prior to your release from active duty in December 2003. Despite medical evidence that 
you were suffering from symptoms ofback pain related to a disc in your lower back, the Board 
determined it had insufficient evidence to conclude you were unable to perform the duties of 
your.office, grade, rank or rating at the time ofyour release from active duty. Several factors led 
the Board to reach its conclusion. First, the Board noted that you were not placed in a 
Temporary Not Physically Qualified status until April 2004. This was approximately four 
months after you were released from active service. Second, your lumbar condition was only 
rated at 10% by the Department ofVeterans Affairs (IfA) in July 2004. While VA ratings are 
not dispositive evidence of fitness for continued naval service, the Board considered the 
relatively low disability rating issued by the VA as additional evidence that your condition was 
not a debilitating disability in 2003. Third, despite a finding by BUMED that you were not 
medically qualified for retention in the Marine Corps Reserve due to your condition, the Board 
noted you were employed in a combat zone for 15 months shortly after your release from the 
Marine Corps Reserve. These three factors led the Board to conclude that insufficient evidence 
exists to find that you were unfit at the time ofyour release from active duty. 

Regarding your PTSD disability claim, the Board similarly felt it lacked evidence that it was an 
unfitting disability condition in 2003. Many ofthe same factors that led the Board to determine 
your lumbar condition was not unfitting, convinced the Board that any PTSD symptoms you may 
have been experiencing in December 2003 did not prevent you from continuing your duties in 
the Marine Corps Reserve. Most convincing to the Board was your willingness to enter a 
combat zone on two occasions; in 2006 and 2007, despite your claim that you were suffering 
from PTSD and unable to perform your duties in 2003. Further, the Board noted that you 
completed a degree in Economics in 2011. So despite a VA PTSD rating of 50% from 2012, the 
Board felt there was strong objective evidence that you were fully capable ofperforming your 
duties in December 2003 based on your post-separation accomplishments, regardless ofthe 
challenges you experienced in completing them. Accordingly, the Board determined no error or 
injustice exists in your case. 

While the Board was unable to recommend granting the reliefyou requested, it was pleased to 
hear you were granted benefits from the VA to compensate and treat you for your service 
connected disabilities. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 
submission ofnew and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered 
by the Board. In the absence ofsuffident new and material evidence for reconsideration, the 
decision ofthe Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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