DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JLP: ddj
Docket No: 2442-02
17 December 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 17 December 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.
opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420
of which is attached.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
N130D2/02U0664 of 22 November 2002, a copy
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. 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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
2000 NAVY PENTAGON
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20350-2000
IN REPLY REFER TO
5420
N 13 0 D2
22 Nov 2003
/02UO66&
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
IN THE CASE OF SEAMAN
Encl:
(1) BCNR case file
#02442-02
with microfiche service record
1.
The
following provides comment and recommendation on Seaman
petition.
N130 recommends disapproval o
2.
for an Enlistment Bonus (EB).
petition
Seaman
3.
31 July 2001 and volunteered for the Airman-Sea Farer School
Guarantee Program.
allow payment of
He requests favorable action that would
entered the Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on
an.EB.
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.
on quotas provided by the Commander,
the Enlisted Community Managers, not by the number of "A" School
accession seats.
EB.
service record and
does: not have an EB contract in his
not entitled to an EB.
therefore.'is
recruit'.is
Every
The EB program is budgeted based
Navy Recruiting Command and
not offered nor receives an
5.
BCNR case file with microfiche service record is returned
Program Analyst
Enlisted Bonus Programs
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03840-02
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. 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. The EB program is budgeted based Navy Recruiting Command and Seaman .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06895-02
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. D.C. 20350-2000 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 N130Dl/ 29 Ott 2002 02UO591 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF SEAMAN w Encl: (1) BCNR case file #06895-02 with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04972-02
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 | 07245-02
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 | 00249-02
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 | 05739-02
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 | 07147-02
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 | CY2002 | 07000-02
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. 2002. that would allow payment of an $8,000 He shipped to Recruit T In his petition, Seaman 2001, and signed contract for a volunteered for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07284-02
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 | 06671-02
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