MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            24 February 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC97-09556
				   AR1999016268

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Payment of incentive specialty pay (ISP) bonus that he did not receive during the period he served as a board-certified radiologist at Brooke Army Medical Center from June 1992 to June 1994.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the receipt of ISP obligates the receiver to one year of service obligation from the date of receipt.  He received only one ISP which was for the period October 1992 to October 1993.  He was eligible to receive the bonus after completion of all necessary training in June 1992, but was denied the opportunity to sign for the bonus and receive payment until October 1992.  By not voluntarily extending his commitment until October 1994, he did not receive an ISP bonus in October 1993.  He submits a copy of the regulation (message) regarding the ISP program, which does not preclude receipt of bonus after completion of training.  Because he fulfilled all the criteria in July 1992, he should have received a bonus in June/July 1992 and in 1993.  He requests an additional bonus of $24,000.    

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was a medical corps officer, whose primary specialty was that of a diagnostic radiologist, who entered active duty on 9 June 1987.  He completed residency training in diagnostic radiology at Walter Reed Army Medical Center  on 30 June 1992.   On 22 April 1992 orders were published assigning him to Brooke Army medical Center at Fort Sam Houston, Texas with a reporting date of 13 July 1992.  

On 7 March 1994 the applicant submitted a request for unqualified resignation from the Army to become effective 30 June 1994.  His request was approved and he was discharged on that date in the rank of Major.  He had 7 years and           22 days of service.  

A DA message, which the applicant submits as justification for his additional ISP bonus, announced the revised ISP rates for FY 94 and prescribed DA policy governing entitlement to ISP for medical corps officers.  That message states, in pertinent part, that an officer with a FY 93 ISP agreement expiring during FY 94 rather than on 30 September 1993, may terminate that agreement on or after      1 October 1993 in order to enter into a new one-year agreement.  Unearned ISP amounts must be recouped on a prorata basis.  That message also states that officers are not eligible for ISP if initial residency training will be completed in    FY 94.  Initial qualification in an ISP specialty  -  Officers graduating from initial residency or initial ISP qualifying fellowship training during the ongoing fiscal year will become eligible for entitlement to ISP effective 1 October of the following fiscal year.    

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Office of the Surgeon General.  An official of that agency stated that DOD policy requires a 90 day wait upon graduation from a civilian or military residency before an officer may execute an ISP agreement in that specialty.  The applicant graduated from his radiology residency 30 June 1992 and executed an ISP agreement effective 1 October 1992, 90 days post graduation.  The applicant is entitled to no other special pays.  That official recommended that the applicant’s request be denied.

The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant on 17 November 1998 for his information and possible rebuttal.  He failed to respond.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  Apparent in this case is that the DA message submitted by the applicant, although applicable to ISP entitlements and rates for FY 94, continues previous DA policy concerning ISP; that is, a medical corps officer who is eligible for an ISP bonus executes an agreement and is entitled to that bonus beginning with the start of the fiscal year.  The applicant became eligible for the bonus upon completion of his residency training, received a bonus beginning 1 October 1992, which continued until the end of that fiscal year.  He did not receive a subsequent ISP bonus because of his decision to resign from the Army effective 
30 June 1994.  The applicant is not entitled to an additional ISP bonus. 

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__cmf___  __mdm___  _bje____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC97-09556/AR1999016268	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990224	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 128.14		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.