DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 2079-16 
AUG 3 1 2016 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with new Board for 
Correction ofNaval Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 
F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were previously denied relief by this Board on 
10 June 2015.

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 28 June 2016. Your allegations oferror 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 ofyour 
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, after careful and conscientious 
consideration ofthe entire record, the Board determined that while your request does contain 
new information not previously considered by the Board, it does not warrant relief. Accordingly, 
your request has been denied. The names and votes ofthe members of the panel will be furnished 
upon request. 

The Board members also considered your request for a personal appearance; however, they 
found that the issues in the case were adequately documented and that a personal appearance 
would not materially add to the Board's understanding ofthe issues involved. Thus, your 
request for a personal appearance has been denied. 

The Board carefully considered your contention that on 2 November 2013 you requested to 
voluntarily extend at sea for the Sea Duty Incentive Pay. You further contend that your previous 
command the failed to submit the paperwork for approval. The Board found that you failed to prove that you submitted a properly submitted 
NAVPERS 130617 (Enlisted Personnel Action Request) for Sea Duty Incentive Pay/ 
Back-to-Back (SDIP-B). The Board concurred with the advisory opinion that a Sailor must be 
approved for the SDIP prior to receiving orders. The Board further concurred with the advisory 
opinion, OCNO memo 7220 Ser NI30D/16U00601 of3 May 2016, that on 25 September 2013 
you were issued orders; then on 2 November 2013 you submitted a Page 13 requesting the 
SDIP-B. The Page 13 was never received by PERS-40. The Board further concurred with the 
advisory opinion that even if PERS-40 had received the Page 13, your request would not have 
been approved. Submission of a Page 13 requesting SDIP-B is not the proper method for 
requesting the incentive; additional, requests for SDIP must be request prior to receiving orders. 
Based on these conditions, the Board has determined no change to your record is warranted. 

It is regrettable that the circumstances ofyour case are such that the Board will not process any 
additional reviews and this matter is considered a final action. However, ifyou wish to continue 
to seek relief you will need to present your concerns to a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director 
Acting