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

Docket No. 9446-17 
MAY 29 2018 


This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, 
the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable 
material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. 

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 3 May 2018. The names and votes of the members ofthe panel will be furnished 
upon request. Your allegations oferror 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable 
statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in July 2002. You 
were placed on Limited Duty on 3 June 2004 after experiencing multiple episodes of loss of 
consciousness associated with severe headaches. You were continued in Limited Duty until 4 
August 2005 when you were returned to full duty with specific limitations that disqualified you 
from worldwide operational deployment. On 7 October 2005, Navy Personnel Command 
directed your administrative separation processing due to unsuitability for operational duty. You 
were notified of separation processing on 12 October 2005 and acknowledged your rights. On 2 
November 2005, you were discharged due to condition not a disability. As of March 2017, the 
Department ofVeterans Affairs (VA) rated you for a number of service connected disabilities 
including obstructive sleep apnea, migraine headaches, and neurocardiogenic syncope. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability 
retirement list. You assert that you possessed ratable disability conditions at the time ofyour 
discharge. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In order for a 
Servicemember to be found unfit for continued naval service by the Physical Evaluation Board, 
the member must be unable to perform the duties oftheir office, grade, rank or rating due to a 
qualifying disability. In your case, the Board detennined there was insufficient evidence to 
support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service due to your headaches or sleep 
apnea at the time of your discharge. The Board relied upon the 4 August 2005 neurologist report 
that removed you from Limited Duty status in which he noted your fainting spells had 
discontinued and you had an unremarkable neurologic examination. His medical decision to 
return you to duty, albeit with specific limitation that disqualified you from operational duty, was 
convincing evidence that he felt your disability conditions did not meet the criteria for referral to 
the Physical Evaluation Board or a disability retirement. In other words, he made a medical 
detennination that you were reasonably able to perfonn the duties ofyour office, grade, rank or 
rate. The Board also examined the basis for your separation, MILPERSMAN 1910-120, and 
concluded that the Navy had the discretion to process you for separation since you were not 
world-wide assignable due to your medical conditions. It is important to note that the mere 
presence ofdisability conditions that are ratable does not equate to eligibility for military 
disability benefits. As explained earlier, there must be demonstrated duty perfonnance 
impainnent of sufficient 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. 

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