Dear ,  
 
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  2020.  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 2 December 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 1 December 2019 along with your response to the opinions. 
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in October 2009.  You were involved in a motor vehicle accident in February 2010 that led to headache symptoms that were treated in September 2010.  You were also treated for anxiety symptoms in July 2010 that was diagnosed as an adjustment disorder.  From November 2009 through March 2011, your weight continued to increase resulting in multiple Body Composition Assessment (BCA) and Physical Fitness Assessment (PFA) failures.  After failing your third BCA in 2001, you were eventually discharged on 17 January 2012 for PFA failure. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list.  You assert that you suffered Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and damage to your endocrine system that contributed to your weight gain.  You also allege unfitness for continued naval service due to anxiety, vertigo, and other muscular and orthopedic issues.  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 2 December 2019 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 1 December 2019.  First, the Board concluded there was insufficient medical evidence to support a finding that your weight gain was related to a disability condition.  As pointed out in the advisory opinion, medical records show that your thyroid studies were normal with no evidence of endocrinology issues.  Additionally, the Board found no evidence that you were medically waived from BCA measurements.  Therefore, the Board found that your administrative separation for PFA failure was supported by the evidence of your multiple BCA failures.  Second, the Board determined the preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your discharge.  Unfitness is defined as the inability to perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating as a result of a qualifying disability condition.  In your case, the Board examined your performance evaluation ending 17 January 2012 and found that you were performing your duties well at or above fleet standards.  Your professional knowledge and job accomplishment were rated at 3.0.  Your quality of work was rated at 4.0.  Despite the fact you were marked with significant problems due to your inability to meet weight standards, the Board noted your overall trait average was still at 3.0.  This was strong objective evidence to the Board that you were able to perform your duties despite the existence of any disability conditions.  Third, the Board also considered your medical condition at the time of your discharge.  Despite your assertion that you were unfit for TBI, anxiety, vertigo, and other disability conditions, the Board noted you were medically cleared for separation on 11 January 2012.  The separation physical also documents that you were not taking medication at the time.  In the Board’s opinion, the results of the separation physical led them to conclude you were more likely than not fit for active duty at the time of your discharge.  Finally, the Board did not find persuasive your argument that your disqualification from sea duty substantiates your unfitness.  SECAVINST 1850.4E states that the “inability to meet screening criteria for a specific assignment or administrative requirement; i.e., deployment, overseas or sea duty assignment, or participation in PRT/PFT cycle, does not justify referral” to the Disability Evaluation System.  So when considered against your documented ability to perform at fleet standards for your paygrade and rating, the Board found the preponderance of the evidence supported a finding that you were fit for active duty despite your inability to screen for sea duty. 

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 provided you are able to establish a service connection.  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.