DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6416-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Chief of Naval Operations Action Memo of 28 December 2013 (3) Psychiatric Advisor, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards letter 1920 CORB: 002 of 13 April 2020 (4) Director, Secretary of the Navy, Council of Review Boards letter 1920 CORB: 001 of 17 April 2020 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a retired Naval officer, filed the enclosure with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting the following relief and corrections to his record: a. Restoration of his promotion to Lieutenant Commander; b. Repayment of recouped Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) bonus installment and payment of unpaid installment, and c. Change to his Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) findings to a 70% disability rating. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 May 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval service records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy. b. Petitioner was commissioned and entered active duty in the Navy on 11 August 2002. He served as a SWO for approximately 10 years without incident until his assignment to as Operations Officer in February 2012. c. After completing an initial period of training, Petitioner approached his Commanding Officer and requested to be relieved of his duties as Operations Officer on 1 March 2012. He expressed an inability to meet the expected standard of performance and was placed in medical for observation after displaying symptoms of paranoia. The following day Petitioner changed his mind about his desired to be relieved as Operations Officer before readmitting himself to medical on 3 March 2012. At that point, Petitioner was transferred to Naval Medical Center due to possible suicidal ideations and his refusal to contract for safety. He was eventually released from treatment and assigned to Commander, Naval Surface Force while pending a detachment for cause (DFC) from . d. Petitioner was recommended for DFC on 19 March 2012 due to unsatisfactory performance of duty involving a significant event and was also recommended to show cause for retention. Commander, Navy Personnel Command approved Petitioner’s DFC on 26 November 2012 and later directed he show cause for retention at a Board of Inquiry (BOI). On 29 January 2013, a BOI unanimously determined Petitioner did not fail to maintain an adequate level of performance and recommended his retention. e. Petitioner was previously selected by the FY-13 Active Duty Navy Lieutenant Commander Line (URL) Promotion Board with a projected promotion date of 1 July 2013. His promotion was withheld pending review of adverse information. On 28 December 2013, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) recommended Petitioner’s removal from the FY-13 Active Duty Navy Lieutenant Commander Line (URL) promotion list. See enclosure (2). Despite a favorable endorsement from Commander, Naval Surface Force Atlantic to promote Petitioner, CNO expressed his lack of trust and confidence to promote Petitioner since the promotion board did not review his DFC. As a result, he felt it necessary to allow for further evaluation of Petitioner’s conduct. The Secretary of theNavy approved Petitioner’s removal from the promotion list on 1 May 2014. f. In the meantime, a medical board referred Petitioner to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for Bipolar Disorder, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder on 18 November 2013. The PEB found Petitioner unfit for continued naval service due to his PTSD condition and assigned him a 70% disability rating consistent with a proposed Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability rating for his condition. Petitioner was transferred to the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) on 28 October 2014 pursuant to his PEB findings. g. Petitioner was seen for his periodic TDRL examination on 25 July 2016. The report documented his continued symptoms but documented that he was working as an operations manager with Black and Decker, attending school, and maintaining a successful marriage with children. Based on Petitioner’s post-discharge activities, the PEB lowered Petitioner’s disability rating to 30% on 18 August 2016. It later affirmed its findings on 12 October 2016 after Petitioner requested reconsideration. Petitioner was subsequently transferred to the Permanent Disability Retirement List with a 30% disability rating for PTSD. h. On 7 June 2019, Petitioner filed the enclosure requesting the aforementioned changes to his record. The Board bifurcated his application to separate the SWO bonus issue from the promotion and disability issues for administrative efficiency. Therefore, only the issues contained in paragraphs 1.a and 1.c. are before you for decision. Petitioner’s SWO bonus claim is still pending Board review and will not require Secretary of the Navy review. i. In response to the enclosure, enclosures (3) and (4) were issued by the Department of the Navy office with oversight over all PEB issues. The advisory opinion determined the evidence supports increasing Petitioner’s PDRL rating to 70%. The opinion relied on medical medications that documented Petitioner’s annual significant mood episodes that resulted in psychiatric hospitalizations and/or lapses at work. It was also noted that Petitioner’s VA rating remained at 70%. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. The Board, concurring with the opinions contained in enclosures (3) and (4), determined that Petitioner’s disability rating should be changed to 70% effective the date of his transfer to the PDRL. In reaching this conclusion, the Board relied on the periodic TDRL examination report that documents Petitioner’s continued difficulties with his PTSD symptoms that included a post-discharge psychiatric hospitalization. Additionally, the Board felt increasing his rating to 70% would be consistent with the VA rating assigned to Petitioner at the time he was transferred to the PDRL. Regarding Petitioner’s request to be retroactively promoted to Lieutenant Commander, the Board determined the preponderance of the evidence does not support relief. The Board agreed with CNO’s rationale for removing Petitioner from the promotion list. Specifically, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s DFC from was a significant event that was not considered by the FY-13 Active Duty Navy Lieutenant Commander Line (URL) Promotion Board and, more likely than not, would have resulted in his non-selection to Lieutenant Commander if the information was considered. Despite the BOI finding that Petitioner did not fail to maintain adequate level of performance and recommendation that he be retained in the Navy, the Board felt his DFC, by itself, was a significant enough event to merit his removal from the promotion list. RECOMMENDATION In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action: Petitioner’s record be corrected by changing Petitioner’s PEB record to show that he was rated at 70% effective the date of his transfer to the PDRL. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.