DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 1219-16 SEP 27 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. The names and votes of the members of the 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, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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. You enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 14 February 2011. On 13 December 2013, you were assigned to the Remedial Conditioning Program (RCP) for failing a command PFT [Physical Fitness Test], CFT [Combat Fitness Test], or is assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP). You were assigned to the program for a minimum of 30 days. You were counseled and acknowledged the Administrative Remarks (NA VMC 118(11) of 13 December 2013, of your assignment to the Marine Corps BCP, and "that failure to take corrective action and meet established weight/body composition standards may result in administrative separation from the USMC for either weight control failure or unsatisfactory performance per paragraphs 6202 and 6215 ofMCO P1900.16F." You were also given specific recommendations for corrective actions. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. On 13 April 2014, you were counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NAVMC 118(11 ), regarding your failure to comply with the established weight/body composition standards while assigned to the Marine Corps BCP. You were "advised that failure to take corrective action will result in administrative separation for weight control failure per paragraph 6215 ofMCO Pl900.16F." You were also given specific recommendations for corrective actions. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. On 13 June 2014, you were counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NAVMC 118(11 ), concerning your extension on the Marine Corps BCP and that you were "granted a one-time extension of6 months to meet the body composition standards set forth in MCO 6110.3 W /CH 1." You were also "advised that failure to take corrective action, while on this 6 month extension, will result in administrative separation from the USMC for either weight control failure or unsatisfactory performance per paragraphs 6206 and 6215 ofMCO Pl900.16F." You were also given specific recommendations for corrective actions. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. On 13 October 2014, you were counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NA VMC 118(11 ), regarding your failure to comply with the established weight/body composition standards while assigned to the Marine Corps BCP. You were "advised that failure to take corrective action will result in administrative separation for weight control failure per paragraph 6215 ofMCO PI 900.l 6F ." You were also given specific recommendations for corrective actions. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. On 13 December 2014, you were counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NA VMC 118(11 ), regarding your unsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps BCP. You were also notified that you were being processed for administrative separation for unsatisfactory performance per paragraph 6206 ofMCO PI900. I 6F. You were advised assistance was available through your chain of command. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling, and you elected to submit a statement that same day, 13 December 2014. On 4 May 2015, you were counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NAVMC 118(11 ), concerning the deficiency ofunsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps BCP. You were also advised that due to insufficient effort, you did not meet your weight/body composition reduction goals. You were given specific recommendations for corrective actions in order to comply with all the highest standards ofconduct and all military regulations. You also acknowledged that you were being processed for an administrative separation for unsatisfactory performance. You were given 5 days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. Your contention is that you signed an Administrative Remarks (NA VMC 118(11) on 2 June 2015 with the commanding officer, stating that you "have been assigned the reenlistment eligibility code ofRE-3P," however, the RE-Code was changed to RE-4. You were given an, opportunity to submit a rebuttal to the Administrative Remarks, and you chose not to submit one. It was noted that on 6 August 2015, you were again counseled and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NAVMC 118(11), concerning the deficiency ofunsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps BCP. That your performance again "due to insufficient effort, you did not meet your weight/body composition reduction goals." You were given specific recommendations for corrective actions in order to comply with all the highest standards of conduct and all military regulations. You also acknowledged that you were being processed for an administrative separation for unsatisfactory performance. You were given five days to submit a rebuttal to the counseling and you chose not to submit a statement. Subsequently, on 14 August 2015, you were issued your "Notification of Separation Procedures" by reason of unsatisfactory performance, weight control/body composition program failure. You signed and initialed the "Acknowledgment ofMy Rights to be Exercised or Waived During Separations Proceedings" that same day, which contained acknowledging the type of discharge you would be receiving, the reason for discharge, and that you had spoken to counsel. You also acknowledged that you were being discharged prior to completion ofyour service requirement. Subsequently, on 23 November 2015, your commanding officer directed your separation. On 29 November 2015, you signed and acknowledged an Administrative Remarks (NAVMC 118(11) with the commanding officer, stating that you "have been assigned the reenlistment eligibility code ofRE-4." You were given an opportunity to submit a rebuttal to the Administrative Remarks, and you chose not to submit one. On 30 November 2015, while serving in the paygrade E-3, you were discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) and were assigned an RE-4 reentry code. The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to change your RE-4 reentry code and upgrading your discharge. However, the Board determined that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to meet and maintain appropriate physical readiness standards, despite the many opportunities you were given to become within the Marine Corps' established weight/body composition standards while assigned to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program (BCP). Accordingly, your application has been denied. 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 of new evidence within one year from the date ofthe 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 ofan official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director