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

Docket No. 8409-16 
Feb 13 2017 

Dear 

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 new Board for Correction ofNaval Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 
F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). This Board previously denied your case on 16 ovember 2015. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2016. Your allegations oferror 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that while your request does not contain new information not previously considered by the Board, your request for reconsideration based solely on injustice was warranted. However, your request has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 

The Board carefully considered your contention that you were initially selected for advancement to E6 by taking and passing the February 2015 cycle 096 Navy Wide Advancement Examination (NW AE) and that you re-enlisted into Full Time Support (FTS) based on the direction of your Career Counselor. However, the Board concluded that you have not provided any evidence to support that you were mandated to re-enlist on or by a certain date. Furthermore, had you waited until the results ofthe NWAE had been published, you would have been required to have an advancement determination made by the Naval Personnel Command (NPC) prior to being able to re-enlist as an E6; the Board is unable to determine based on the documentation provided whether or not this would have been approved. 

It is regrettable that the circumstances of your case are such that the Board will not process any additional reviews and this matter is considered a final action. However, if you wish to continue to seek relief you will need to present your concerns to a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director