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 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. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy Reserve in 
after five months of prior active service and approximately 10 months of inactive service. 
you suffered a sudden onset of a tremor to your head and right upper extremity 
while deployed to You were eventually referred to the Physical Evaluation Board 
(PEB) in for tremor, right shoulder dysfunction, and gait disorder. After being 
found unfit for continued naval service by the PEB you were issued a 30% 
disability rating for head and right upper extremity tremors resulting in your placement on the 
Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) on You underwent a periodic 
TDRL examination on that opined your unfitting condition would not prevent you 
from performing your job in the Navy. Based on the TDRL periodic examination report, the 
PEB found you fit to return to active duty in the Navy Reserve. You accepted the findings of the 
PEB on but chose not to return to active duty. You later attempted to enlist in the 
Navy but were denied enlistment based on your failure to meet enlistment physical standards due 
to a number of physical disability conditions. You currently possess a combined 90% disability 
rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability 
retirement list. You assert your current VA rating and the Navy’s decision to deny you 
enlistment in supports a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service in 
Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board did not find 
the Navy’s decision to deny you enlistment in persuasive to your argument that the PEB 
erred in finding you fit for active duty in Navy physical accession standards are different 
from the Department of Navy PEB unfitness standard and are utilized for different purposes. 
Navy accession standards exist to determine whether an individual is physically qualified to 
enter into the Navy or Marine Corps with a disability condition. While the PEB fitness standards 
are used to determine whether a servicemember can perform the duties of the office, grade, rank 
or rating with an existing disability. So occupational impairment due to a disability is the 
primary criteria for a finding of unfitness by the PEB while accession standards are more 
concerned with the existence of disability conditions, whether they are treatable, and the impact 
of the disability conditions on an individual’s ability to perform military duties. Therefore, the 
Board concluded that Navy physical accession standards are more stringent that PEB standards 
since the mere existence of a disability condition, in many cases, can be disqualifying. In your 
case, the PEB found the disability condition that resulted in your placement on the TDRL was no 
longer sufficiently impairing to prevent your return to active duty. Had you taken that 
opportunity to return to active duty, you could have continued your Navy career. However, by 
not returning to active duty with the PEB decision in you were properly subjected to the 
more stringent accession standards for enlistment. So the Board did not find the PEB’s decision 
to find you fit for active duty inconsistent with the Navy’s decision not to enlist you in 
since Navy accession standards are different than PEB standards for fitness and, in the Board’s 
opinion, more stringent. Second, for similar reasons, the Board did not find your VA ratings 
probative on the issue of fitness for active duty 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. 
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.