DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 9412-19 Ref: Signature Date 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 16 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 opinions contained in Psychiatric Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in February 1996. You were seen for mental health symptoms in 2008, after a deployment to Afghanistan, that continued through January 2010. However, it was a Right Total Hip Arthroplasty (RTHA) that led to your initial Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) finding of unfitness on 7 January 2013. Though, you were later approved for Permanent Limited Duty status and continued on active duty. In 2015, you were again referred to the PEB for your RTHA along with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and other orthopedic back issues. As a result, the PEB found your RTHA unfitting but concluded all your other referred disability conditions were not separately unfitting. Based on a proposed Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating of 50% for your RTHA condition, you were transferred to the Permanent Disability Retirement List on 27 September 2016. The Board carefully considered your arguments that your RTHA rating was erroneously rated at 50% and that you were unfit for your lumbar degenerative disc disease and PTSD. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinions. Specifically, the Board determined the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service due to your back condition or PTSD. Based on this finding, the Board concluded that a combat-related determination for your PTSD condition is not required. In determining whether you were unfit due to your back or PTSD, the Board considered the non-medical assessment from 21 July 2015. This assessment states you were unable to perform the full range of duties as a result of your hip replacement despite acknowledging that you were also being referred for your back condition and PTSD. Further, the assessment documents that you were successfully performing administrative and managerial duties despite your disability conditions. In fact, your performance evaluation ending on 15 November 2015 is consistent with the assessment based on your assigned a trait average that documents you were performing well above fleet averages for your paygrade and rating. Since your non-medical assessment did not identify limitations related to your back or PTSD, the Board concluded it supports the PEB determination that those disability conditions were not separately unfitting. The Board also considered your 28 August 2015 medical board referral for PTSD. That report states that you are being referred to the PEB based on your inability to perform your duties at an “exemplary” level. In the Board’s opinion, this was further evidence your PTSD did not create a sufficient occupational impairment to prevent you from performing the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating since it implies you were able to perform your assigned duties. Finally, the Board considered the medical evidence regarding your back condition. The evidence shows that you suffered from mildly degenerative changes that required intermittent treatment. Without additional evidence that these degenerative changes, that only required intermittent treatment, somehow prevented you from performing your assigned military duties, the Board felt insufficient evidence exists to support a finding you were unfit as a result of your back condition. The Board considered your rebuttal evidence that shows you required further treatment after your discharge and were recommended for inpatient PTSD treatment. However, the Board was not persuaded by this evidence since the medical evidence leading up to your placement on the disability retirement list document that neither your PTSD or back conditions prevented you from performing your military duties; a fact substantiated by documented your superior performance. Therefore, the Board felt you were appropriately found unfit for your RTHA condition based on your command’s determination that it prevented you from performing a number of duties associated with your rating but felt similar evidence of an occupational impairment did not exist for your PTSD or back condition. The Board also found no error or injustice in your 50% PEB assigned rating for your RTHA. The PEB is required to adopt proposed VA ratings for PEB referred conditions as part of the Integrated Disability Evaluation System regulations. Since you were assigned a proposed rating of 50% by the VA for your RTHA, the Board concluded the PEB acted properly in assigning you a 50% rating absent evidence of a VA determination of an error with their proposed rating. 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,