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

Docket No. 2293-19 
Ref:   Signature Date 

From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:    Secretary of the Navy 

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 
     (b) BUPERSINST 1610.10D (EVALMAN) 
     (c) NAVADMIN 233/15 
     (d) OPNAVINST 6110.1J 
     (e) NAVADMIN 178/15 

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/enclosures 
      (2) Evaluation report and counseling record for the reporting period 16 Nov 14 to 15 Nov 15 
      (3) Evaluation report letter-supplement of 21 Mar 17 
      (4) NPC memo 1610 PERS-32 of 7 Mar 19 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his record be corrected by removing his evaluation report letter-supplement, and changing Block 20 (physical readiness) of his evaluation and counseling record from “PF” (pass/fail) to “PP” (pass/pass) 

2.  The Board, consisting of       , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 10 March 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
 
3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, found as follows: 

a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy. 

b.  Petitioner was issued enclosure (2), an evaluation report and counseling record (Eval) for the reporting period 16 November 2014 to 15 November 2015.  Block 20 (physical readiness) of his Eval was marked “PP” (pass/pass). On 21 March 2017, Petitioner’s reporting senior (RS) submitted enclosure (3), a supplemental letter to change Block 20 of Petitioner’s Eval from  “PP” to “PF” (pass/fail), per reference (c). 

c.  Petitioner asserts that his Eval was originally correct and contends that the supplemental letter was added in error, and he cites NAVADMIN 233/15, which does not apply in his case. Petitioner asserts that his Eval, as modified by the supplemental letter, is in error because, per NAVADMIN 178/15, all body composition assessment (BCA) failures were waived for Cycle 1­2015. 

d.  In an advisory opinion (AO) at enclosure (4), PERS-32 determined that the supplemental letter is in error and should be removed. The AO determined that reference (d) provides guidance for the Physical Readiness Program, and that references (c) and (e) made policy changes. The AO noted that reference (e) provides a policy change for BCA and physical fitness assessment (PFA) failures. Specifically, BCA measurements exceeding current standards during Cycle 2-2015 would not count as a PFA failure. Additionally, the physical readiness test (PRT) would continue to be administered, and PRT failures incurred during Cycle 2-2015 would be documented in PRIMS and count as PFA failures. The AO noted that reference (c) provided policy changes for a Sailor pending separation as a result of failing three PFAs in the most recent four-year period, and that it allowed Sailors to be retained until they were able to participate in PFA Cycle 1-2016, but that a Sailor would continue to receive evaluation grades per reference (e). 

The AO further noted that  Petitioner’s Physical Readiness Information Management System (PRIMS) record indicates that he failed his BCA for Cycle 2-2015 but received a score of good (GD) on his PRT.  PERS-32 concluded that Petitioner’s PRIMS record, as well as reference (e), support his contention that the PFA code in Block 20 should be “PP” and should not have been changed to “PF” by the letter supplement. 

CONCLUSION 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the AO, the Board determined that Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  The Board concurred with the AO that Petitioner’s PRIMS record and reference (e) both support his contention that the PFA code in Block 20 should be “PP” and should not have been changed to “PF” by the letter supplement. The Board thus concluded that Petitioner’s enclosure (3), his evaluation report letter supplement of 21 March 2017, shall be removed from his record. 

RECOMMENDATION 

In view of the above, the Board recommends the following corrective action. 

Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing enclosure (3), his evaluation report letter supplement of 21 Mar 17. 

4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 

5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 

Sincerely,