DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No. 8757-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. 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 4 April 2019. 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. 

A review of your record shows that you entered service with the Navy in March 2008. On 3 
November 2016, the issued a recommendation that you be waived from the Physical Readiness Test for the next 60 days. However, you were not waived from the curl-up and cardio portion of the PRT 
when your NAVPERS 6110/3 PARFQ was reviewed by medical personnel on 27 December 
2016. As a result, you were marked as “UA” from the Cycle 2 2016 PRT. Subsequently, you 
were waived from the all parts of the PRT for Cycle 1 2017. On 24 April 2017, a memorandum 
signed by the Authorized Medical Department Representative from 
informed your command that they believed an error was committed by medical personnel when 
they chose not to waive you from the entire Cycle 2 2016 PRT. An unsigned letter dated 11 June 
2018 from your command supporting a change to your PRIMS record to remove the Cycle 2 
2016 PRT failure was submitted to Director, Physical Readiness and Community Support 
(N135F). However, it appears your request was returned without action since your command 
request letter was not signed or on letterhead. You subsequently filed an application with this 
Board. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that your PRIMS record should be changed to 
remove the PRT failure from Cycle 2 2016. Unfortunately, the Board felt it lack the required 
evidence to make the change and also felt you had not yet exhausted your administrative 
remedies. While the Board agreed with you that there may be an error with your PRIMS record 
based on the evidence you submitted, it felt you must first attempt to resolve the issue by 
resubmitting a signed command letter on letterhead as directed by the PRIMS office. For the 
same reason your request was returned by the PRIMS office, the Board also felt it lack the 
necessary evidence to make the change you requested since the unsigned letter makes it appear 
as if your command does not support your request. Since the 3 November 2016 letter from was only a recommendation, the command had no requirement to follow it once your PARFQ was reviewed by medical personnel. The Board encourages you to obtain a signed endorsement from your command on letterhead and resubmit it to the PRIMS office with the evidence you submitted to this Board. Should your request be denied after you followed the requirements for consideration by the PRIMS office or if you are unable to obtain a proper command endorsement to change your PRIMS record despite requesting one, then you should consider submitting another application to this Board with additional evidence to explain your additional attempts to exhaust your administrative remedies. Accordingly, the Board concluded insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. 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 this regard, 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, 

4/8/2019 

 
Executive Director