DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No. 9520-17 
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 ofprobable 
material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 3 May 2018. 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions ofyour naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in May 1998. You 
served without incident until 2014 when you were seen after experiencing suicidal ideations. A 
mental health evaluation resulted in a diagnosis of depression with anxiety and your placement 
on psychotropic medication. Your diagnosis and treatment medication resulted in your 
recommendation for permanent disqualification for nuclear field and submarine duty on 13 
January 2015. After your NEC removal was approved by Navy Personnel Command (NPC), you 
requested administrative separation in lieu of force conversion on 18 March 2015. Your request 
was approved by NPC on 24 March 2015. In the meantime, a 19 February 20 15 change in 
prescription medication to Lexapro led to a medical finding that your depression condition was 
in full remission. On 30 April 2015, you were discharged pursuant to your request with an 
Honorable characterization of service. Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 
rated you for a number of service connected disabilities including generalized anxiety disorder at 
70%. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability 
retirement list. You assert that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your 
discharge from active duty due to mental health disability conditions. Unfortunately, the Board 
disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board found convincing evidence that you 
were fit for active duty at the time of your discharge from the Navy. In order to find that a 
member is unfit for continued naval service due to a disability, it must be established that the 
medical disease or condition underlying the diagnosis actually interferes significantly with the 
member's ability to carry out the duties ofhis or her office, grade, rank or rating. In your case, 
the Board examined your performance from 16 September 2014 through your discharge date and 
concluded there was conclusive evidence you were able to perform your military duties despite 
the existence of any disability conditions. Specifically, your 30 April 2015 performance 
evaluation shows that you earned a 4.0 trait average and an early promote recommendation. This 
was conclusive evidence to the Board that your performance was well above the fleet average 
and you were capable ofperforming your military duties. The fact you were facing force 
conversion due to your NEC removal was not persuasive evidence ofunfitness since a 
Servicemember may still be found to be unsuitable for certain assignments because of medical or 
physical limitations despite being found fit for active duty. The Board concluded that fitness for 
active duty means your condition would not have prevented you from reasonably performing a 
job somewhere within the Department of the Navy. Second, the Board took into consideration 
that you requested your administrative separation from the Navy in lieu of force conversion. In 
the Board's opinion, you made a personal choice to separate from the Navy instead of pursuing 
other potential career paths within the Navy. Third, the fact the VA rated you for a number of 
service connected disabilities effective upon your discharge was determined not to be sufficient 
evidence of unfitness to overcome your documented superior performance leading up to your 
discharge. In particular, the Board did not find the VA's determinations probative since 
eligibility for compensation and pension disability ratings by the VA is tied to the establishment 
ofservice connection and is manifestation-based without a requirement that unfitness for military 
duty be demonstrated. As pointed out earlier, the Board found convincing evidence in your 
military record that you were performing extraordinarily well despite the existence ofthe 
disability conditions rated by the VA. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour 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 of regularity 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