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. 
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on  9 July 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 opinion contained in Director CORB letter 1920 CORB: 001 of 13 May 2020; a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. 
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty and served as a Naval Flight Officer and Naval Science Instructor.  In January 2018, you were seen for bilateral lower extremity polyneuropathy that caused chronic foot pain and led to your disqualification from aviation duty.  On 31 August 2018, you reported a number of symptoms related to your ankle/foot, shoulder, and back but stated none of these symptoms limited your ability to work in your military specialty.  However, a 13 December 2018 report of medical history notes that you were diagnosed with Charcot Marie Tooth and grounded from aviation duties.  On 1 April 2019, you were released from active duty for non-selection for promotion.     
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you were unfit for continued naval service due to your diagnosed Charcot Marie Tooth condition.  You argue that your disqualification from aviation duty and subsequent ineligibility for Reserve duty supports a finding that you should have been placed on the disability retirement list.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with 
the advisory opinion in your case.  Specifically, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your release from active duty.   
 
In order for a service member to be unfit for continued naval service, there must be evidence that the member is unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating due to a qualifying disability condition.  In your case the Board noted that you were released from active duty for non-selection for promotion rather than due to any occupational impairment caused by your Charcot Marie Tooth condition.  As pointed out in the advisory opinion, despite your disqualification for flight duty, it appears you were working as an instructor at the time of your release from active duty and performing your duties in a satisfactory manner.  Additionally, disqualification from special duties such as aviation does not, per se, qualify a member as unfit since the requirement for unfitness requires a broad inability to perform any duties within your paygrade.  Since it appears you were able to perform duties not requiring you to fly, the Board concluded you did not meet the criteria for unfitness. 
 
Regarding your argument that your disqualification from Reserve duty substantiates your unfitness, the Board again disagreed.  The Board concluded that standards for accession or continuation in the Reserve are different from active duty retention standards.  As a result, a member who is fit for continued active duty may not be able to join the Reserve due to existing disability conditions once released from active duty.  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.  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,    
7/13/2020