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 relevant 
portions of your naval record and your application, 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 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 20 May 2020 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 
11 June 2020; copies of which were previously provided to you for comment. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in August 2005 and 
deployed to in 2007. You were medically cleared for separation on 10 June 2010 despite 
symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Medical reports in July 2010 document 
that you continued to suffer from PTSD symptoms but a 25 August 2010 mental health report 
determined you suffered from no cognitive abnormalities or thought impairment. You were 
again medically cleared for separation on 31 August 2010 prior to your discharge from the Navy 
on 1 September 2010. Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for 
PTSD at 10% effective 2010 but later increased your rating to 70% in 2013. You were also rated 
for a number of other disability conditions. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you were unfit for continued naval service 
due to your PTSD at the time of your discharge. You assert that you were in the process of 
seeking a medical board and undergoing cognitive therapy when you were discharged from the 
Navy. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their 
findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinions in your case. 

First, in order to be found unfit for continued naval service, a service member must be unable to 
perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating due to a qualifying disability condition. 

In your case, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding 
that you were unfit. Despite evidence that you were suffering from PTSD symptoms and taking 
medication for treatment, the medical evidence just prior to your discharge from the Navy 
documents that you were cleared for separation and released without limitations. The Manual of 
the Medical Department Chapter 15-20 requires separation examinations and evaluations for 
active duty members and states “comprehensive evaluations are conducted for the purposes of 
ensuring that Service members have not developed any medical conditions while in receipt of 
base pay that might constitute a disability that should be processed by the Physical Evaluation 
Board (PEB) and to ensure Servicemembers are physically qualified for recall to additional 
periods of active duty. Thus, the standards for being physically qualified to separate are the 
same as those being qualified to continue active duty Service … .” So based on the results of 
your separation physical and the 31 August 2010 medical report that confirmed you were cleared 
for separation, the Board concluded you were fit for active duty at the time of your discharge 
from the Navy. The Board also noted that you were assigned an unrestricted reenlistment code 
by the Navy. Based on this evidence, the Board determined you were free to reenlist without 
restriction and chose to end your Navy career on your own volition rather than for medical 
reasons. 

Second, the Board considered your VA ratings issued upon your discharge and concluded they 
did not support a finding of unfitness. You were assigned a 10% rating for your PTSD upon 
your discharge that indicates mild symptoms with minimal impairment. In the Board’s opinion, 
this was consistent with the Navy medical determinations that you were able to perform duties 
associated with your office, grade, rank or rating despite the existence of your PTSD. The Board 
took note of your disqualification from Fleet Marine duties but concluded you were not 
medically disqualified from performing multiple other duties appropriate for an E4 or Hospital 
Corpsman. 

Third, the Board considered your arguments regarding you seeking a medical board and 
undergoing cognitive therapy. The evidence shows that a medical board report was completed 
on 3 July 2010 by a Licensed Certified Social Worker. However, that individual was not 
qualified to complete a medical board report. Further, you were seen by mental health on 25 
August 2010 and determined to have normal cognitive functioning with no thought impairment. 
The Board concluded that the later medical report superseded any previous medical reports since 
it was prepared later in time and closer to your discharge date. Additionally, as previously 
discussed, your 2010 post-discharge VA rating for PTSD is consistent with mild symptoms 
described in the August 2010 medical report. 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, 

8/11/2020