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

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 of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were previously denied relief by the Board on. After careful and conscientious consideration of the 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. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 July 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the 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 CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 29 January 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 13 February 2019 along with your response to the opinions.

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list for Other Stressor-Related Disorder, Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), and Fibromyalgia.  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 CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 29 January 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 13 February 2019.  First, the Board found there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that your symptoms for Other Stressor-Related Disorder warranted your placement on the disability retirement list.  Despite your argument that a misdiagnosis was made by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) when you were rated for Somatoform disorder, the Board noted that your new diagnosis was based on the same symptoms used by the PEB.  So the Board considered whether your symptoms caused a severe enough occupational impairment to warrant your placement on the disability retirement list.  After examining your ability to maintain employment from the time you were placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) through at least April 2019, along with your achievement of a masters level degree, the Board concluded their was insufficient evidence to support a finding that your Other Stressor-Related Disorder created a sufficient occupational impairment to warrant your placement on the disability retirement list.  Based on the evidence, the Board concluded that your capacity for work and study increased after you were placed on the TDRL, contrary to your arguments that your symptoms prevented you from continuing employment.  According to your work history, after leaving PPG in August 2016, you obtained employment with     in January 2017 and started your masters level studies in the Fall of 2017.  You later started a second job with     and a third position as an adjunct university professor in 2019 after completing your masters level education.   In the Board’s opinion, this was strong evidence of fitness for active duty vice unfitness and did not support placing you on the disability retirement list.  For the same reasons, the Board did not find sufficient evidence to support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service due to IBS or Fibromyalgia.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant your placement on the disability retirement list. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

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 of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the decision of the 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 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely,


7/10/2019