Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00249-02
Original file (00249-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

NAVY 

ANNEX

2 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JLP: ddj
Docket No: 249-02
26 November 2002 
_

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. 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, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420  
which is attached.

1/02UO594  of 29 October 2002, a copy of

N130D 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in
the advisory opinion. Accordingly,  your application has   been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
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.

In this regard, it is important
Consequently,

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE  OF THE   CHIEF OF   NAVAL  OPERATIONS

2000 NAVY   PENTAGO N

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20350-2000

IN REPLY  REFER TO

5420
N13 
29 

ODl/ 02210594
Ott  2002

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF SEAMAN

I 

',

Encl:

(1) BCNR case file  

#00249-02

 with microfiche service record

The following provides comment and recommendation on Seaman

1.
Apprentice

petition.

Apprentic

N13O  recommends denial of Seaman Apprentice

2.
petition for an Enlistment Bonus (EB) College K
3. Seaman 
(DEP) on 16 February 2001,
Electronics Field (AECF) Program Guarantee, and signed an EB
contract in the amount of  
that would allow payment of an EB  
the EB that is included in his contract.

$13,000.

entered the Delayed Entry Program
volunteered for the Advanced

He requests favorable action
Colle'ge  Kicker in addition to

but a recruiting tool used at the

EB is not an entitlement,

4.
discretion of recruiters and classifiers to entice individuals
to enlist in critical skills.
on quotas provided by the Commander,
the Enlisted Community Managers, not by the number of "A" School
accession seats.
under the preceding rules.
receives an EB College Kicker.

An EB College Kicker is an EB and is governed
Every recruit is not offered nor

The EB program is budgeted based

Navy Recruiting Command and

$13,000  and

Seaman Apprentice

c3 .
amount of  
of his training pipeline and qualification in the skill for which
He is not entitled to an EB College
he was offered the EB.
Kicker because it was not offered by his classifier nor included
in his contract upon entrance into the Navy.

has a valid EB Contract in the
tled to that payment upon completion

COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION

IN THE CASE OF SEAMAN

BCNR case file with microfiche service record is returned

6.
herewith as enclosure (1).



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04268-02

    Original file (04268-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. Seaman 2001. and signed an EB contract in the to Recruit Training Command (RTC) requests.favorable action that Kicker in addition to the EB is not an entitlement, but a recruiting tool used at the 4. discretion of recruiters and classifiers to entice individuals to enlist in critical skills. Correction of Naval Records, Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07245-02

    Original file (07245-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FORCORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JLP : ddj Docket No: 26 November 2002 7245-02 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. h A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. In addition, the Board considered the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04972-02

    Original file (04972-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. 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. In addition; the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420 which is attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07284-02

    Original file (07284-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420 N which is attached. An EB College Kicker is an EB and is governed Every recruit is not offered nor Navy Recruiting Command and the Seaman Apprentice Garcia has a valid EB Contract in the amount 5 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07147-02

    Original file (07147-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. N130 recommends denial of Seaman Apprentice 2. petition for an Enlistment Bonus (EB) College Ki of $3,000. He shipped to Recruit Training Command (RTC) on 1 e entered the Navy through the 29 March 2002, volunteered for the Seaman Apprentice...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00320-03

    Original file (00320-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2003. D.C. 20350-2000 IN R E P L Y R E F E R TO 5420 N13 OD1 / 0 3 ~ 0 2 4 5 26 Mar 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF SEAMAN APPRENTICE . In his petition, Seaman Apprentice a requests favorable action that would allow payment of a $2,000 EB College Kicker.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05739-02

    Original file (05739-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420 which is attached. D.C. 20350-2000 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 N130D1/ 29 Ott 2002 02UO582 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF, I T Encl: (1) BCNR case file #05739-02 with microfiche service record 1. Every recruit is not offered nor The EB program is budgeted based Navy Recruiting Command and Seaman,mhas a valid EB Contract...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06671-02

    Original file (06671-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. 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. COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION CASE OF SEAMAN

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07125-02

    Original file (07125-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. would allow payment of an EB College Kicker in addition to the EB that is included in her contract. Every recruit is not offered nor The EB program is budgeted based Navy Recruiting Command and s a valid EB Contract in the amount of $4,000 5. that payment upon completion of her training an pipeline and qualification in the skill for which she was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02811-02

    Original file (02811-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. An EB College Kicker is an EB and is governed Every recruit is not offered nor The EB program is...