DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH : ddj
Docket No: 5290-02
10 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 10 December 2002.
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 NPC memorandum 5420 Ser
copy of which is attached.
N130D1/02U0648 of 22 November 2002, a
Your allegations of error and
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
BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20370-5000
IN REPLY REFER TO
5420
Ser
22 Nov 2002
N130DlO2uO648
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
Ref:
COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER PETTY,
*,: .t
I^
(a) U.S. Code Title 37
(b) DOD Financial Management Regulation
§308
7000.14 Vol. 7A
Encl:
(1) BCNR File
#05290-02 with microfiche service record
The following provides
1.
Petty Officer
of a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) not be required due to
the nature of his discharge.
comment and recommendation on former
requests the recoupment
petition.
From the
s request.
case was
ed portion of
N130 recommends denial
is not entitled to keep the
SRB is a retention incentive paid to enlisted members serving
2 .
perspective of Enlisted Bonus Programs,?
appropriately handled and recoupment of
the bonus is correct.
unearned portion of SRB following his early separation from the
Navy after his wife left him and their children.
3.
in certain critical skills (ratings and/or specific skills) who
reenlist for additional obligated service.
SRB is a monetary
incentive paid on top of basic military pay and allowances.
is used to increase the number of reenlistments of personnel in
critical skills having insufficient retention levels to
adequately man and sustain the career force.
to the bonus the member must maintain skill qualification and
Failure to maintain
availability to serve (work) in the skill.
qualifications or active duty status results in recoupment of the
per references (a) and (b).
unearned portions of the bonus,
unearned portion is that part of the bonus from the time the
member stops working in the bonus skill to the end of authorized
(EAOS) .
Recoupment is required when a member
obligated service
In these cases, the member separates
separates for parenthood.
early because they do not appropriately certify they have made
adequate arrangements to meet Department of the Navy dependent
care policy.
To remain entitled
It
The
Subi:
COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER PETTY
Programs Policy Section
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01396-00
D.C. 20350-200 NAV Y S 0 IN REPLY REFER TO 5420 Ser 14 June 2000 N130D/ OuO329 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS via: Assistant for BCNR Matters (Pers-OOZCB) Ref: (a) DODINST 1304.22 Encl: (1) BCNR File #01396-00 with microfiche service record The following p.rovides comment and recommendation on former 1. Petty Officer initial enlistment into the Navy was ay she signed an agreement and 3. on 1 June 1987. statement of understanding that by electing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07322-98
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH:mh Docket No: 7322-98 25 May 1999 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 25 May 1999. equests repayment of tive Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) recouped...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5701 13
Jn your case, the Board agreed with the advisory opinions that, because you did not gain and maintain proficiency in the community and for the NEC that you received the bonus, in the Board’s view, recoupment of the unearned portion of the bonus was appropriate. After reviewing all the circumstances in your case, in the Board’s view, the decision to recoup the unearned portion of the bonus was just, and the half separation pay you received was properly awarded according the Separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605486C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the unearned portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) that was recouped from him be given back to him. APPLICANT STATES: That the unearned portion of his SRB was recouped from him under the false assumption that his separation was due to his own misconduct. In view of the preceding, the applicants separation for weight control failure was properly considered voluntary for the purpose of the collection of the unearned portion of his SRB monies.
Coast Guard members who have at least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A,” while those who have more than 6 but less than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Members may not receive more than one SRB per zone. The JAG argued that the applicant was eligible only for a Zone B SRB because he had completed more than seven years of active duty when he reenlisted, and pursuant to Article 3.C.4.b.3. The Board will exercise its authority and grant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002235
The applicant states: * he signed an agreement to serve in the Indiana Army National Guard (INARNG) for 6 years in exchange for a $10,000.00 OAB * he transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) because his original unit, the 38th Support Battalion, closed * his higher headquarters decided to slot him in a position but then placed a major (MAJ)/O-4 in the same position * his assigned unit closed/reorganized and there was no slots in his State for his area of concentration (AOC) without being...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Fri Jan 26 13_54_43 CST 2001
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. DC 20350-2000 N REPLY REFER TO 5420 Ser N13OD/159—99 9 Sep 99 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF Via: Assistant for BCNR Matters (NPC—OOZCB) NAVAL RECORDS Subj: COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION IN THE CASE OF?~~~~M End: (1) BCNR File #03425-99 with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07973-07
Documentary material of your application, together with thereof, your naval record and and policies. In ntially concurred with the comments Accordingly, your application has of the members of the panel will be ances of your case are such that You are entitled to have the Board ission of new and material evidence neidired by the Board. He has requested that recoupment of his SRB be stopped.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010232
He completed the UH-60 Aviator Qualification Course from 28 January through 8 March 2008. An NGB official stated that in accordance with ARNG Implementation Guidance for the CSRB, dated 1 February 2008, eligible officers could receive the CSRB. The applicant served in the ARNG as a warrant officer between 26 June 2006 and 19 January 2010.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006765
b. Paragraph 6i states that officers who meet the qualification and who execute a 3-year CSRB contract and service agreement will be paid $20,000.00. c. The applicant signed a CSRB agreement with the Ohio ARNG on 2 November 2008 in critical AOC 19A. The issue is confusing because NGB says his agreement shows his bonus AOC as 19A and his command says his bonus AOC was 19B, but the CSRB contract does not list any AOC.