PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            22 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000049344

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that she be paid the enlistment bonus promised her when she enlisted. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that she enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91C (Practical Nurse) with the understanding that she would receive a cash bonus of $1,000.00.  She claims that when her unit submitted the request for the bonus payment, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) responded with a discrepancy letter and she would like at this time to be provided the enlistment bonus she was promised.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 10 May 1996 she enlisted in the USAR for 8 years and immediately entered active duty for her initial active duty training (IADT).  

5.  The enlistment contract completed on the applicant contains a Department of the Army (DA) Form 5261-R (Selected Reserve Incentive Program-Enlistment Bonus Addendum), which indicates that she was enlisting in a unit and MOS identified for a enlistment bonus entitlement of $1,000.00.  This addendum was signed by the applicant and certified by the Army Guidance Counselor on the date of her enlistment, 10 May 1996.  

6.  A Department of Defense (DD) Form 1966/3 (Record of Military Processing- Armed Forces of the United States) completed on the applicant on the date of her enlistment confirms, in Section VI (Remarks), that the applicant would receive an enlistment bonus of $1,000.00 in payment installments as follows:  
50 percent upon completion of AIT; 20 percent upon completion of her second year of service; and 30 percent upon completion of her fourth year of service.  In addition, this document was also signed by the applicant and certified by her Army Recruiter on 10 May 1996.  

7.  A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant upon her release from active duty (REFRAD) confirms she was honorably separated from active duty on 20 March 1998 after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 11 days of active military service.  This document also verifies that she successfully completed 52 weeks of training in Phases 1 and 2 of the Practical Nurse Course, which resulted in her being awarded MOS 91C.  Upon  her REFRAD she was transferred to the 2290th Army Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, a Troop Program Unit (TPU), to serve the remainder of her USAR enlistment. 

8.  Upon the applicant’s successful completion of training and return to her TPU, the unit administrator submitted a request for her to receive her initial enlistment bonus payment.  This payment was rejected and returned to the unit asking that they confirm the unit and MOS were on the bonus list in May 1996, when the applicant initially enlisted.  

9.  On 27 October 1999, the 2290th Army Hospital staff administrator submitted an exception to policy requesting that the applicant receive the enlistment bonus outlined in her contract.  

10.  On 3 November 1999, the Chief of the Retention Office, 99th Regional Support Command (RSC), Oakdale, Pennsylvania disapproved the exception to policy request.  The reason given was that the enlistment bonus addendum to the applicant’s contract was erroneously executed for a solider who did not meet the eligibility requirements necessary to receive an enlistment bonus and therefore, her enlistment contract was erroneous.  The applicant was given the following three options:  first to remain in her unit as a drilling reservist without the benefit of the bonus; second to request discharge based on an erroneous enlistment; and third to apply to this Board to pursue redress for any perceived injustice.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the exception to policy denial of the 99th RSC, after careful examination of the available evidence, the Board concludes that relief is warranted in this case.  

2.  The evidence of record makes clear that the applicant was promised, in writing, an enlistment bonus of $1,000.00 in her enlistment contract.  This bonus entitlement and the terms of the contract were confirmed by the appropriate Army representatives on the date of her enlistment and she accepted these terms in good faith. 

3.  In the opinion of the Board, the options given the applicant by the 99th RSC in the denial of her request for an exception to policy, other than application to this Board, are unjust and inequitable to both her and the Army.  The option for her to continue to serve as a drilling reservist without the benefit of the enlistment bonus violates the written commitment made to her by the Army.  She had the legitimate right to expect, if she met her contractual obligations, that the Army would do likewise.  

4.  Further, the option that would allow the applicant to apply for discharge is equally inequitable and unjust to the Army.  The Army made a significant investment in time and money in training the applicant in MOS 91C, with the expectation that the applicant would serve in the USAR for 8 years and a TPU for 6 years in return, her discharge now would result in the Army losing the investment already made. 

5.  Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity to both the applicant and the Army, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate for the applicant to be paid the $1,000.00 enlistment bonus under the terms agreed to in her enlistment contract.  

6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by providing the individual concerned a $1,000.00 enlistment bonus under the terms agreed to in her enlistment contract of 10 May 1996, as an exception to policy. 

BOARD VOTE:  

__slp ___  ___jpi ___  ___rks___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_____Shirley L. Powell_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000049344	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/03/22	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  1025	112.1100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.