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

Docket No. 4516-18 
Ref: Signature Date 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.  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 20 June 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.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion contained in Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 7 May 2019, a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. 

A review of your record shows you entered active duty with the Navy in September 2004.  After developing symptoms of fatigue and depressive disorder, you were referred to a medical board on 22 June 2012.  The medical board referred you to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), which found you unfit for continued naval service due to major depressive disorder and fatigue.  Based on your combined 90% disability rating, you were placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) on 27 April 2013.  In March 2016, you underwent a periodic examination, which showed you possessed elevated levels of creatinine kinase (CPK) levels.  In February 2018, a kidney functions tests showed you again had elevated CPK levels.  However, the PEB reduced your fatigue disability rating to 0% prior to transferring you to the Permanent Disability Retirement List. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that the PEB failed to properly consider your elevated CPK levels prior to reducing your disability rating for your fatigue condition.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion contained in Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 7 May 2019.  Specifically, the Board agreed there was insufficient evidence that your fatigue condition warranted a disability rating higher than 0%.  Despite the fact you had elevated CPK levels, the Board noted that your periodic TDRL examinations did not show you were suffering from fatigue level commensurate with a higher disability rating.  The 3 March 2016 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) report shows that you were exercising at least once a week by running up and down hills.  Additionally, the 13 October 2017 VA problems list does not mention fatigue as a problem.  These two factors led the Board to conclude that your fatigue condition was mild and was appropriately rated by the PEB despite your elevated CPK levels.  As pointed out in the advisory opinion, the mere existence of elevated CPK levels does not equate to a higher disability rating for fatigue and there must be other evidence of impairment to warrant a higher disability rating.  The Board agreed with this rationale in making their decision.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 

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 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, 
6/24/2019