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

Docket No. 372-17  
SEP 11 1017  

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 10 August 2017. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 suppo1t thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in October 1988. With the exception of one non-judicial punishment in January 1989, you served without incident and were discharged within three months ofyour active duty obligation with an Honorable characterization of service on 23 July 1992. On 26 March 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs issued a l0% disability rating for reflux esophagitis with hiatal hernia. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability retirement based on service connected disabilities rated by the VA. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board could find no evidence that you were unable to perform your military duties as a result of a qualifying disability. You provided your VA rating as substantiation for your assertion but 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. The Board lacked evidence that you were unfit for continued naval service based on an occupational impairment caused by a disability. Second, even if your reflux esophagi tis with hiatal hernia condition was determined to be unfitting, the Board concluded the 10% disability rating issued by the VA does not qualify for placement on the disability retirement list since it falls below the required 30% rating for such a 
placement. Accordingly, the Board was unable to find an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied your application.
 
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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director