DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2008-005 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

FINAL DECISION 

This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section 425 of 
title 14 of the United States Code.  The Chair docketed the case on October 5, 2007, upon receipt 
of  the  applicant’s  completed  application,  and  assigned  it  to  staff  member  J.  Andrews  to  pre-
pare the decision for the Board as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  June  24,  2008,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
The  applicant,  an  operations  specialist,  third  class  (PS3)  in  the  Coast  Guard  Selected 
 
Reserve (SELRES), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is entitled to a $6,000 
bonus for signing a six-year enlistment contract on December 11, 2006.  Although the contract 
does not mention the bonus, the applicant alleged that his Coast Guard recruiter promised him a 
$6,000 bonus and documented his entitlement to the bonus in writing.  However, after he enlisted 
in the Reserve, the Coast Guard refused to pay him the bonus.   
 

In support of his allegations, the applicant submitted an “Enlistment Package Check-Off 
List,” which indicates that he was enlisting in the Reserve RQ program as a seaman (no rating) 
with an approved “ship date” of January 7, 2007, and that a $6,000 SELRES enlistment bonus 
had been offered as an enlistment incentive.  It also shows that he had prior military service and 
was guaranteed a place in OS “A” School so that he could become an operations specialist.  The 
applicant also submitted a copy of a CG-3307 (“Page 7”), which was signed by himself and his 
recruiter on the day he enlisted and which states the following: 

 

 

 

 

 
I have been advised that I am eligible for a      $6,000      SELRES enlistment or affiliation incen-
tive bonus.  Receipt of this bonus commits me to SELRES participation through     12/11/12 .  I 
hereby acknowledge that I read and fully understand the contents of COMDTINST 7220.1 Series, 
ALCOAST 056/06 and the Selected Reserve Bonus Matrix (updated 02/01/06). 

In  addition,  the  applicant  submitted  an  email  conversation  dated  August  16,  2007, 
between his unit’s yeoman and a military pay technician at the Personnel Services Center.  The 

technician stated that although the applicant and his recruiter signed the Page 7 concerning the 
bonus, the applicant was not eligible for the bonus because he was not enlisting in the Reserve 
but reenlisting because he had prior military service as he served in the U.S. Army for four years 
from November 1995 to November 1999 and in the California National Guard from November 
1999 to November 2001.  In addition, the technician stated, the applicant was not eligible for a 
prior service bonus because he was reenlisting as a seaman rather than a petty officer, and he was 
not  eligible  for  an  affiliation  bonus  because  he  had  already  completed  his  original  military 
service obligation. 

 
Finally,  the  applicant  submitted  an  email  dated  August  17,  2007,  from  the  applicant’s 
recruiter,  who  signed  the  Page  7  and  the  enlistment  contract  on  December  11,  2006.    The 
recruiter stated the following: 

 
I’m sorry to see the response that you have received regarding your bonus.  I do not make deci-
sions regarding bonuses.  I can only make requests to Recruiting Command; then they make the 
decisions.  Requests to approve the conditions of enlistment are made via the internet data system 
for recruiting.  The request is called a reservation request.  In response to my request for your res-
ervation,  Recruiting  Command  authorized  you  a  $6,000  bonus.    I  can  fax  you  a  copy  of  the 
authorization if you like, along with the Page 7.  I object to [the technician’s] statement that I mis-
counseled you.  His statement infers that I made up your bonus decision out of thin air, and he 
should know better.  Whether or not there was an error in their decision making process, Coast 
Guard Recruiting Command authorized you a bonus, and that bonus was promised to you in writ-
ing by the Coast Guard.  I don’t see how your bonus can in good faith be denied.  I recommend 
that you continue to pursue your bonus via your chain of command. 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 

On March 4, 2008, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted an 
advisory opinion and recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request but grant alter-
nate relief by “correct[ing] the error on the CG-3307 dated 11 December 2006, to delete $6000 
and reflect $0.”   

 
The  JAG  admitted  that  the  record  “does  document  that  Applicant  was  advised  in  an 
Administrative Remarks (CG-3307) dated 11 December 2006, that he was eligible for a $6,000 
SELRES enlistment or affiliation incentive bonus.”  The JAG noted, however, that no promise of 
the  bonus  appears  on  the  enlistment  contract  that  the  applicant  also  signed  on  December  11, 
2006.  In addition, the JAG pointed out that ALCOAST 056/06 states that to be eligible for a 
SELRES enlistment bonus, the recruit must have no prior military service; must enlist in the RP, 
RK, RX, or RA program; must enlist in the MK, MST, or OS rating for at least six years; and 
must complete initial active duty for training (IADT).  The applicant did enlist in the OS rating 
for six years, but he had prior military service and enlisted in the RQ program.  Therefore, the 
JAG concluded, the Page 7 signed by the applicant and his recruiter on December 11, 2006 was 
“invalid,  erroneous,  and  unauthorized”  and  “it  is  evident  that  neither  the  applicant  nor  the 
recruiter understood the contents of COMDTINST M7220.1 Series, ALCOAST 056/06, and the 
Selected Reserve Bonus Matrix,” although they indicated by their signatures that they had read 
and  understood  them.    The  JAG  further  concluded  that  “[u]nfortunately  for  the  applicant,  the 
enlistment  contract  is  valid  as  no  agreement  for  the  requested  SELRES  bonus  was  contained 
within that document.”  The JAG argued that payment of the promised bonus “is an inappropriate 
remedy as no authority exists to pay him.” 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
invited him to respond within thirty days.  No response was received.  

On March 6, 2008, the Chair sent the applicant a copy of the JAG’s advisory opinion and 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

Article 1.G.1.b. of the Personnel Manual provides the following definitions of enlistment 

 

 

 

and reenlistment in the Reserve: 

 
The enlistment of any person into the Coast Guard Reserve who has not previously served in the 
Coast Guard Reserves shall be considered an original enlistment, even though he or she may have 
previous  service  in  the  Regular  Coast  Guard.  This  includes  those  members  who  are  discharged 
from the Regular Coast Guard and enlist within 24 hours in the Coast Guard Reserve. The enlist-
ment of any person who has previously served in the Coast Guard Reserve shall be considered a 
reenlistment. 
 
Article  3.A.1.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  states  that  the  enlistment  bonus  program  is  an 
incentive to attract qualified personnel to critical skills or ratings to help meet the Coast Guard’s 
recruiting goals.  The program applies to new enlistees. 

 
Article 3.A.3.2. states that enlistment bonuses “are linked to a member’s recruitment and 
affiliation with a critical rating by attending a guaranteed Class “A” school or participating in a 
guaranteed “Striker” program in that rating or, for prior service personnel who already have the 
qualifying skill, agreeing to enlist in the designated rating for a minimum of four years. An addi-
tional amount may be offered for the member to accept an enlistment of six years.” 
 
 
pared by the applicant’s recruiter, states the following: 

ALCOAST 056/06, which was issued on February 1, 2006, and cited on the Page 7 pre-

 
2.  SELRES Enlistment Bonus. 
  A. Eligibility Requirement for Initial Enlistment (new accession with no prior military service) 
under the RP, RK, or RX programs:  Applicant must enlist in either the MK, MST, or OS ratings 
for at least six years and must complete initial active duty for training (IADT).  Applicants may be 
assigned either to an RPAL vacancy or as an over billet. 
  B.    Bonus  Amount:    A  total  of  6,000  dollars  is  authorized  to  be  paid  in  two  equal  amounts.  
(3,000 dollars may be paid after completion of IADT and 3,000 dollars may be paid one year later 
if  participation  standards  contained  in  Chapter  4  of  [Reserve  Policy  Manual]  have  been  met).  
IADT  consists  of  basic  training or Reserve Enlisted Basic Indoctrination (REBI) plus A-School 
completion if required. 
 
3.  Prior Service Enlistment Bonus. 
  A.  Eligibility requirement for former enlisted member with over seven years nine months but less 
than 13 years of combined military service:  Member must commit to either a three-year or a six-
year  SELRES  agreement  under  the  RQ  program  and  must  serve  in  the  BM,  MK,  MST,  or  OS 
ratings as an E-5 or above.  Applicants may be assigned either to an RPAL vacancy or as an over 
billet. 
  B.  Bonus Amounts: 

     (1)  For a six-year SELRES agreement, a total of $8,000 is authorized to be paid in two equal 
amounts. … 
     (2)  For a three-year SELRES agreement, a total of $4,000 is authorized to be paid in two equal 
amounts. … 
 
4.  Affiliation Bonus. 
  A.  Eligibility requirement for RELAD personnel in the BM, MK, MST, or OS ratings, E-5 or 
above, who are obligated to serve the remainder of their initial eight-year military service obliga-
tion (MSO) in the Ready Reserve:  Member agrees to affiliate with the SELRES for a minimum of 
three years after RELAD. … 

 

PREVIOUS BCMR DECISIONS 

 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-027, the applicant had been promised a Reserve enlistment 
bonus by her recruiter.  However, when she finished recruit training, the Coast Guard refused to 
honor  that  promise  because  she  was  technically  ineligible  for  the  bonus  since  she  had  never 
graduated from high school.  The Chief Counsel recommended that the Board grant the appli-
cant’s request.  He argued that, although the government is not estopped from repudiating erro-
neous advice given by its officials, relief should be granted because the bonus was promised her, 
she provided due consideration for it, and acted promptly when she discovered the error.  The 
Board granted the applicant’s request. 
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-121, the applicant stated that he had been promised a Level II 
$2000 SELRES enlistment bonus by his recruiter.  The bonus was cited on his enlistment con-
tract  and  in  a  Page  7  dated  the  same  day.    He  did  not  receive  the  bonus  because  he  was  not 
assigned to a designated critical unit under the ALCOAST then in effect.  The Chief Counsel 
stated  that  the  contract  was  voidable  so  the  applicant  could  be  discharged  but  recommended 
against granting the applicant the unauthorized bonus. The Board, however, granted relief, find-
ing that while “the government may repudiate the erroneous advice of its officers or agents, … 
whenever reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the 
erroneous advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit.” 
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-135, the applicant stated that she had been promised a Level 
II $2000 SELRES enlistment bonus by her recruiter.  The bonus was not mentioned in her con-
tract but was documented on a Page 7 dated the day of her enlistment.  She did not receive the 
bonus because she had not enlisted in a critical rating, although her rating was listed in the appli-
cable ALCOAST as one of those eligible for Level I bonuses if the members were assigned to a 
critical unit.  The Chief Counsel provided the same recommendation as in BCMR Docket No. 
1999-121, and the Board granted relief for the reasons stated in that case as well.   
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 2004-063, the applicant stated that the day after his discharge upon 
completing more than eight years of active duty, he enlisted in the SELRES and was promised a 
SELRES  enlistment  bonus.    His  contract  noted  that  he  was  “entitled  to  SELRES  SRB  as  per 
ALCOAST  192/03.”    However,  that  ALCOAST  clearly  authorized  bonuses only for members 
being  released  to  the  Reserve,  not  for  those  being  discharged  and  choosing  to  enlist  in  the 
SELRES.  The JAG recommended that the Board deny the requested relief but allow the appli-
cant, at his discretion, to be honorably discharged for “Defective Enlistment Agreement,” with a 

KDS separation code1 and an RE-1 reenlistment code.  The Board noted that the applicant was an 
experienced member of the Coast Guard and that even a cursory review of ALCOAST 192/03 
showed that he was not eligible for the SELRES bonus.  Because the bonus was noted in the 
enlistment contract, the Board found the contract to be voidable and granted the relief recom-
mended by the JAG. 
 
 
In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2005-117,  the  applicant  stated  that  he  was  promised  a  $4000 
SELRES  enlistment bonus by his recruiter.  His enlistment contract cited a “RES BON PG7” 
along with the incorporated annexes, and the Page 7, dated the day of enlistment, documented the 
promised $4000 Level II bonus under ALCOAST 268/04.  He did not receive the bonus because 
he had not enlisted in a critical rating or been assigned to a critical unit.  Although the JAG rec-
ommended only that the Board make the contract voidable, the Board granted relief, finding that 
the recruiter had promised the applicant the bonus as an enticement to enlist and that, “whenever 
reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the erroneous 
advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit.” 
 

In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2006-182,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  had  been  promised  an 
$8,000 bonus when he enlisted in the SELRES.  The promise of the $8,000 bonus was docu-
mented on a Page 7 dated ten days before the date of enlistment and was not mentioned on the 
enlistment contract.  The JAG recommended that the Board deny relief because the applicant was 
only entitled to a $4,000 bonus under ALCOAST 268/04 since he had enlisted in a critical rating 
but was not assigned to a critical duty station.  The Board noted that the Page 7 contained many 
errors, that it was not dated the day of enlistment, and that it was not incorporated into the enlist-
ment contract.  The Board also noted that ALCOAST 268/04 did not even mention an $8,000 
bonus as the largest bonus authorized was $6,000, so that “[e]ven someone who merely scanned 
the  ALCOAST  without  much  comprehension  could  not  reasonably  conclude  that  an  $8,000 
bonus was authorized for anyone.”  The Board found that “[l]ike the applicant in BCMR Docket 
No. 2004-063, [this applicant] was clearly not eligible for what he was allegedly promised under 
the applicable ALCOAST, but unlike that applicant, he was not an experienced member of the 
Coast  Guard  who  would  or  should  know  to  read  an  ALCOAST  thoroughly.”    Therefore,  the 
Board  concluded  that  the  applicant’s  enlistment  contract  was  voidable  and  granted  him  the 
option of being expeditiously discharged. 

 
 
In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-006,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  promised  a  $2,000 
SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting in the health services rating as well as a $5,000 bonus for 
having a certain number of college credits.  His enlistment contract incorporated Annex T, which 
documented  the  promised  bonuses.    However,  he  received  only the $5,000 bonus because the 
health services rating was not one of the critical ratings eligible for the $2,000 bonus.  Although 
the JAG recommended only that the Board make the contract voidable, the Board granted relief, 
finding that the recruiter had promised the applicant the bonus as an enticement to enlist and that 
“whenever reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the 
erroneous advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit, i.e., a four-year enlist-
ment in the Coast Guard.”   
 
                                                 
1  Under the Separation Program Designator (SPD) Handbook, a KDS code denotes a “voluntary discharge allowed 
by established directive resulting from non-fulfillment of service contract.” 

In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-207,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  promised  a  $6,000 
SELRES  enlistment  bonus  for  enlisting  to  serve  as  a  PS3  at  a  port  security  unit  (PSU).    The 
promise of the bonus was documented on a Page 7 and the Page 7 was cited on his enlistment 
contract.  ALCOAST 093/05, however, authorized payment of only a $4,000 bonus because the 
applicant was to be assigned to a critical unit—the PSU—but PS3 was not listed as a critical rat-
ing.  Although the JAG recommended that the Board deny relief, the Board granted relief finding 
that “whenever reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on 
the erroneous advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit—i.e., a six-year enlist-
ment  in  the  SELRES.”    The  Board  also  found  that  “although  the  government  is  not  estopped 
from  repudiating  the  advice  of  its  employees,  the  promises  made  by  the  Coast  Guard  to  new 
recruits should be kept when the recruits give due consideration for the promised benefit.” 

 
In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-214,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  promised  a  $6,000 
SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting to serve as a PS3 at a vessel inspection unit.  The prom-
ise of the bonus was documented on an “Enlistment Package Check-Off List,” a “Reservation 
Request,” and a Page 7 dated the day of his enlistment.  The JAG recommended that the Board 
deny relief because the applicant had not enlisted in one of the critical ratings—MK, MST, and 
OS—listed in ALCOAST 056/06.  The Board granted relief for the same reasons as in BCMR 
Docket No. 2007-207.  
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the applicant's 

 
 
military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submissions, and applicable law: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.  

1. 

The application was timely. 
 

2. 

The applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Coast Guard 
erred when his recruiter promised him a $6,000 SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting for six 
years on December 11, 2006.  His recruiter documented that promise on a Page 7 dated the day 
he enlisted, as well as on an Enlistment Package Check-Off List.  In addition, the recruiter stated 
in his email that when he submitted the enlistment application package, the Recruiting Command 
approved the bonus.  Although the Page 7 was not incorporated into the enlistment contract, the 
promise of the bonus was made by the recruiter and approved by the Recruiting Command on the 
day he enlisted and must be considered part and parcel of the bargain struck between the Coast 
Guard and the applicant on December 11, 2006, when the applicant committed himself to six 
years of service in the SELRES. 

The PSC’s military pay technician told the applicant in August 2007 that he was 
not  eligible  for  the  enlistment  bonus  because  he  was  reenlisting  instead  of  enlisting  in  the 
SELRES.  This advice was also erroneous because under Article 1.G.1.b. of the Personnel Man-
ual, the applicant’s contract was an enlistment contract even though he had prior military service 
in the Army and National Guard.  Nevertheless, the applicant was not actually eligible for any of 
the  bonuses  authorized  under  ALCOAST  056/06:    (1)  He  was  not  eligible  for  the  “SELRES 
Enlistment Bonus” described in paragraph 2 of the ALCOAST because he had prior military ser-
vice and was enlisting in the RQ program; (2) he was not eligible for the “Prior Service Enlist-

 
3. 

ment Bonus” described in paragraph 3 because he had only six years of prior military service and 
was enlisting as an unrated E-3, rather than as a petty officer in pay grade E-5 or above; and (3) 
he  was  not  eligible  for  the  “Affiliation  Bonus”  described  in  paragraph  4  because  his  original 
military service obligation had long since expired. 

The  JAG  argued  that  the  Board  should  deny  the  requested  relief  but  hold  the 
applicant to his six-year commitment because the Page 7 promising the bonus was not expressly 
incorporated into his enlistment contract.  However, the record indicates that the recruiter offered 
the applicant the bonus as an enticement to enlist for six years in the SELRES and told him that 
the bonus was approved.  The Board believes that, whenever reasonable, such promises should 
be kept, especially when the member relies on the erroneous advice and gives due consideration 
for the promised benefit—i.e., a six-year enlistment in the SELRES.  Although the Government 
is not estopped from repudiating the bad promises made by its employees,2 this Board has “an 
abiding moral sanction to determine . . . the true nature of an alleged injustice and to take steps to 
grant thorough and fitting relief.”3  The applicant’s recruiter promised him the $6,000 bonus for 
enlisting,  and the applicant has already given consideration on the contract by enlisting in the 
SELRES for six years.  Since he had never been a member of the Coast Guard, he had to rely on 
his recruiter to inform him of his entitlements.  There is no evidence that he would have enlisted 
had he not been promised the $6,000 bonus.   

 
4. 

 
5. 

 
6. 

The Board finds that the applicant’s enlistment contract is voidable because of the 
false promise of the $6,000 bonus.  However, releasing him from the contract by discharging him 
more than a year later would not correct the error or remove the injustice that has been done.  The 
facts of this case are very similar to the facts in several of the prior cases summarized above.  
Like the applicants in BCMR Docket Nos. 2007-214, 2007-207, 2007-006, 1999-135, and 1999-
027, the applicant in this case was promised an enlistment bonus by his recruiter, although he did 
not meet the eligibility requirements, and gave due consideration for the bonus.  In Docket No. 
1999-027, the Chief Counsel recommended that the Board grant relief, but in most cases the JAG 
recommended  denying  the  applicants  the  unauthorized  bonuses.    In  all  these  cases,  the  Board 
granted relief, finding that although the government is not estopped from repudiating the advice 
of its employees, the promises made by the Coast Guard to new recruits should be kept when the 
recruits give due consideration for the promised benefit.   

This  case  is  distinguishable  from  BCMR  Docket  No.  2004-063,  in  which  the 
Board denied the requested bonus, because although this applicant had prior military service, he 
had never been a member of the Coast Guard and was not discharged from active duty in the 
Coast Guard the day before he enlisted in the Reserve.  Therefore, despite his prior military ser-
vice,  this  applicant  did  not  have  the  same  familiarity  with the Service or the same sources of 
information as the applicant in BCMR Docket No. 2004-063, who should have known to read the 
ALCOAST and realized his ineligibility.  This case is also distinguishable from BCMR Docket 
No.  2006-182  because  this  applicant  was  not  obviously  ineligible  for the promised enlistment 
bonus given the complex eligibility criteria under ALCOAST 056/06—even his recruiter and the 
Recruiting Command itself mistakenly promised him the bonus. 

                                                 
2 Montilla v. United States, 457 F.2d 978 (Ct. Cl. 1972); Goldberg v. Weinberger, 546 F.2d 477 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. 
denied sub nom Goldberg v. Califano, 431 U.S. 937 (1977). 
3 Caddington v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 604, 607 (Ct. Cl. 1959).   

 
7. 

 
8. 

 

 
 

Although the applicant was not eligible for the SELRES enlistment bonus he was 
erroneously  promised  by  his  recruiter  and  the  Recruiting  Command,  the  Board  finds  that  the 
Coast Guard’s refusal to pay him the bonus he was promised and for which he has given due 
consideration by enlisting for six years constitutes an injustice4 that must be corrected. 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be granted assuming he meets or has 
met the requirements of paragraph E.2.B. of ALCOAST 056/06 for receiving each half of the 
$6,000 bonus by completing his initial training and OS “A” School and then by meeting the par-
ticipation standards under Chapter 4 of the Reserve Policy Manual during his first year.   

 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

                                                 
4 Reale v. United States, 208 Ct. Cl. 1010, 1011 (1976) (finding that for purposes of the BCMRs under 10 U.S.C. 
§ 1552,  “injustice”  is  “treatment  by  military  authorities  that  shocks  the  sense  of  justice,  but  is  not  technically 
illegal”). 

The  application  of  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCGR,  for  correction  of  his 

ORDER 

 

military record is granted as follows: 

 
  If he has met the participation requirement of paragraph E.2.B. of ALCOAST 056/06 by 
completing his IADT and OS “A” School, his record shall be corrected to show that he is eligible 
for  and  entitled  to  the  first  $3,000  payment  of  the  $6,000  SELRES  enlistment  bonus  he  was 
promised on the Page 7 dated December 11, 2006.   

 
If  the  applicant  meets  or  has  met  the  participation  requirement  of  paragraph  E.2.B.  of 
ALCOAST 056/06 by meeting the participation standards under Chapter 4 of the Reserve Policy 
Manual during the year following his completion of IADT and OS “A” School, his record shall 
be  corrected  to  show  that  he  is  eligible  for  and  entitled  to  the  second  $3,000  payment  of  the 
$6,000 SELRES enlistment bonus he was promised on the Page 7 dated December 11, 2006.   

 
The Coast Guard shall pay him any amount due as a result of a correction made to his 

record pursuant to this order.   

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 Jeff M. Neurauter 

 

 

 
 Lynda K. Pilgrim 

 

 

 
 
 Eric J. Young