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

Docket No. 5556-17 
FEB 04 2019 


Dear , 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that 
conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were 
previously denied relief by the Board on 29 December 2015. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 11 September 2018. 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. 

On 2 December 1996, you entered the Naval Reserve. On 13 July 2008, you entered a period of 
Active Duty. Between 16 November 2008 and 30 September 2009, you were awaiting a Medical 
Board for an injury which occurred while on Annual Training Orders. On 30 June 2010, you 
were transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) and on 1 July 2014, in 
accordance with the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1210, the Secretary of the Navy 
determined that the disability for which you were placed on the TDRL had stabilized and that 
your disability was now Permanent and rated at 70% disabling. Accordingly, you were placed 
on the retired list by reason of a permanent physical disability. 

You requested your records be corrected to reflect 20 years of creditable service to include the 
time spent on the TDRL and performed service by doing qualified correspondence courses. The 
Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, to include your assertions. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that at the time 
you were placed in the TDRL with pay, your immediate reenlistment contract (16 March 2008) 
for 5 years terminated. Furthermore, the agreement to extend enlistment for 12 months was 
invalid due to that termination. Therefore, you were not in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). 
Moreover, per SECNA VINST I 850.4e, since the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found you 
unfit to continue Naval Service, the only actions they could have taken in your case were: 
discharge with or without severance pay, transfer to/continue on TDRL, or transfer to the 
Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL). The IRR was not an option in your case. Per 
BUPERSINST I 001.39F states that retired personnel are eligible to apply for Navy 
correspondence courses; however, retirement points will not be earned. Lastly, on 21 April 
2014, Navy Personnel Command (NPC) made an error by crediting you with correspondence 
courses completed while in a retired status and on 10 September 2014, NPC corrected the 
statement of service. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 
submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered 
by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the 
decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 


Executive Director