MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  1 September 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999018417

	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. Theodore G. Heartley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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:  In effect, that she be paid a targeted selective reenlistment bonus(TSRB) for reenlisting under a current stabilized tour in military occupation specialty (MOS) 88M.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that she reenlisted on 7 December 1998 for 
4 years with a 1-year stabilization option in her present duty assignment without knowing that a reenlistment bonus would be offered effective 1 January 1999.  She further stated that if she had prior knowledge of the reenlistment bonus, she would have delayed her reenlistment.  She also stated that she met the eligibility criteria for the reenlistment bonus.

In support of her request, the applicant provided a copy of selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) message 99-01, dated 25 November 1998, and TSRB message 
99-01, dated 30 December 1998.

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

She initially entered the Regular Army on 14 August 1990 for duty as a vehicle operator in military occupation specialty (MOS) 88M with college fund and station of choice enlistment options.  She had two subsequent 3-year reenlistments on 14 February 1993 and 22 October 1996.  She is currently serving on active duty in the rank of sergeant at Fort Riley, Kansas.

On 7 December 1998, she reenlisted for a period of 4 years with a 12-month stabilization in her current assignment at Fort Riley beginning on 21 October 1999.

TSRB message 99-01, dated 30 December 1998, announced approval to expand the SRB to certain targeted shortage MOS including MOS 88M with an effective date of 1 January 1999.  The message further stated that the purpose for this SRB expansion was to increase retention in critically short specified MOS and installations while improving stability.

In the processing of this case, the staff of the Board was furnished an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) from the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (DA PERSCOM), Chief, Retention Management Division stating, in effect, that TSRB message 99-01 was released on 29 December 1998 with an effective date of 1 January 1999; that there is no advanced notification of changes to SRB and TSRB programs; and that there was no reason for the applicant to delay her reenlistment.

On 23 March 1999, the staff of the Board provided a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant for her comment or rebuttal.  The applicant did not reply to advisory opinion within the allotted time frame of 30 days.

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, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s request is not warranted when the evidence of record is considered.

2.  She should be aware that the Army’s target selective reenlistment bonus program is closely monitored and routinely adjusted to include newly targeted shortage military occupation specialties and delete those no longer considered shortage specialties as the needs of the Army require at any given point and time.  It is impossible for Army leaders to predict when such changes will occur or to provide any advance notice of these changes to those individuals who might be contemplating reenlistment.   

3.  The Board certainly empathizes with her disappointment and inability to benefit from the TSRB due to the timing of the announcement of her MOS 88M in the TSRB program, however, no error or injustice occurred.

4.  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.

5.  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

___SK___  ___JA___  __KW___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999018417	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990901	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	NA	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	NA	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	NA  	
DISCHARGE REASON	NA	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.