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

Docket No. 6857-17 
JUL 3 0 2018 


This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour 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 12 January 2017. After careful and conscientious 
consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, yourˇ application 
has been denied. 

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 12 July 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions ofyour naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Additionally, the Board considered the advisory 
opinions contained in PERS 95 !tr 5740 Ser 95/303 of22 Mar 18 and PERS 836 memo 5420 
PERS 836/033 of6 Apr 18; copies of which were previously provided to you for comment. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you.deserve to be placed on the retirement 
list based on Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA). You assert that you were 
informed by a Disability Counselor that you would be retired under TERA. Unfortunately, the 
Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the Board substantially 
concurred with the advisory opinion contained in PERS 836 memo 5420 PERS 836/033 of 6 Apr 

18. Specifically, the Board concluded that you did not possess the requisite active duty service 
to qualify for retirement under TERA in 1999. As pointed out in the PERS 836 advisory 
opinion, service members were required to have 15 years of qualifying service by 31 March 
1999. A review ofyour record reveals you only possessed 14 years and five months of 
qualifying service in March 1999. Therefore, even ifyou were given erroneous information 
regarding your eligibility for retirement, the Board concluded you were statutorily ineligible for 
retirement under TERA and were properly discharged with severance pay pursuant to the 
Physical Evaluation Board findings that you were unfit for continued riaval service with a 10% 
disability rating.

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 ofnew 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 ofthe 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 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