Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05739-02
Original file (05739-02.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:  
26 November 2002

573902

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.

1/02UO582  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. 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.

In this regard, it is important

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

OFFICE  OF THE CHIEF OF

Y
  NAVAL OPERATIONS

2000 NAVY PENTAGO

N

WASHINGTON. 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.

The following provides comment and recommendation on Seaman

petition.

N13O recommends denial of Seaman
2.
Enlistment Bonus (EB) College Kicker.

petition for an

Seama

ntered the Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on 20
3.
December 2001, volunteered for the Advanced Electronics Field
(AECF) Program Guarantee,
amount of $10,000.
allow payment of an EB College Kicker  
is-included in his contract.

and signed an  EB contract in the
He requests favorable action that would

in addition to the EB that

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
An EB College Kicker is an EB and is governed
accession seats.
under the preceding rules.
receives an EB College Kicker.

Every recruit is not offered nor

The EB program is budgeted based

Navy Recruiting Command and

Seaman,mhas  a valid EB Contract in the amount of

5.
$10,000 and is entitled to that payment upon completion of his
training pipeline and qualification in the skill for which he was
offered the EB.
because it was not offered by his classifier nor included in his
contract upon entrance into the Navy.

He is not entitled to an EB College Kicker

Subj:

THE CASE OF SE

BCNR case file with microfiche service record is returned

6.
herewith as enclosure (1).

Ho#e E. Dolan
Head, Enlisted Bonus
Programs Branch



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 07383-02

    Original file (07383-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO memorandum 5420 which is attached. 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. 20350-2000 54rQl@PLV REFER TO N130D1/02U0589 29 Ott 2002 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NAVAL RECORDS BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF Subj : HE CASE 0 Encl: (1) BCNR case file #07383-02 with microfiche service...

  • 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 | 00249-02

    Original file (00249-02.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 | 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 | 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.