DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 950-16 
OCT 12 2016 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. 

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 29 July 2016. Your allegations of error and injustice were 
reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the 
proceedings ofthis Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your 
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The advisory opinion provided in BUMED ltr 5400 
Ser DTF/16UDTF0023 of4 May 2016 was sent to you on 21June2016 for an opportunity to 
comment prior to being considered by the Board. A copy ofthis advisory opinion is again 
enclosed. After the 30 day period for comment expired without a response, the case was 
presented to the Board. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found that the 
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or 
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in 
the advisory opinion. Specifically, the Board found that paragraph 11.c. ofProgram 
Authorization 132 dated April 2007, states " selectees must obligate to serve 
year for year with a minimum obligation ofthree years active duty." Your Health Sciences 
Collegiate Program obligation was calculated on a year for year basis, with any portion of a year 
considered to be a year. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of 
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew evidence 
within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously 
considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it is important to 
keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director