DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 7476-18 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 opinions contained in Senior Medical Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 19 September 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 27 September 2019 along with your response to the opinions. A review of your record shows that you entered service with the Marine Corps Reserve in 2005. In August 2010, you were exposed to four Improvised Explosive Device explosions while deployed in a combat area. You were eventually placed on limited duty in 2011 during which you were diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). You also underwent surgeries to your shoulder and left knee to treat chronic pain symptoms. On 15 June 2012, you were cleared for full duty and demobilized from active duty. You continued to drill with your reserve unit and worked as a security guard in your civilian capacity. Eventually, you were discharged by the Marine Corps after completing your obligated service. Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for a number of service connected disability conditions including PTSD, cervical strain with herniate disc, tinnitus, back injury, left knee patellofemoral pain syndrome, bilateral hearing loss, left shoulder impingement syndrome, left ankle ligament sprain, left eyelid myokymia, and migraine headaches. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list. You argue that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your demobilization in June 2012 due to PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury, neck injury, left shoulder injury, back injury, and left knee injury. As part of your argument, you assert that the Marine Corps failed to properly process you into the Disability Evaluation System by keeping you on limited duty in excess of 12 months and using an abbreviated medical board. 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 19 September 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 27 September 2019. Specifically, the Board found insufficient evidence to support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service prior to your discharge from the Marine Corps. Despite your arguments that disability regulations were violated in the manner your limited duty and medical boards were processed, the Board did not find these probative on the issue whether you were unfit for continued naval service. In order to place a servicemember on the disability retirement list, there must be sufficient evidence of unfitness for continued naval service due to a qualifying disability condition. In your case, the Board found the preponderance of the evidence supports the opinion that you were more likely than not fit for active duty until your discharge from the Marine Corps. The Board relied on several pieces of evidence in making their findings. First, the Board considered that you requested to be cleared for full duty in May 2012. In the Board’s opinion, this was strong evidence you believed you were fit for active duty despite any symptoms you may have been experiencing. Second, you were medically cleared for full duty in June 2012. The Board relied on this medical finding as evidence that you were fit for active duty at the time of your release from active duty. Third, the Board considered the fact you continued to drill with your unit until you were discharged from the Marine Corps. The Board did not find your argument that your Physical Readiness Test failure substantiates a finding of unfitness persuasive since you were able to complete the Combat Fitness Test during the same reporting period and otherwise performed well in your duties. Therefore, without additional evidence that you were unable to perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating due to your claimed disability conditions, the Board decided the preponderance of the evidence did not support your claim of unfitness for continued naval service. Fourth, the Board also relied on your October 2014 neuropsychological testing results that showed no significant decline in cognitive functioning and VA records that showed your PTSD symptoms were controlled with medication. When considered in conjunction with the June 2012 medical determination that you were fit for full duty, the Board found this further supports they determination that you continued to be fit until you were discharged from the Marine Corps. Finally, the Board was not persuaded by the VA ratings assigned to you on the issue of unfitness for continued naval service since 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. While the Board empathizes with your current medical condition, they felt compensation and treatment for your disability conditions fall outside the scope of the Department of Defense disability system and under the purview of the VA. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 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 case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or 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, 12/26/2019