IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 July 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080000448 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records to void his 15 December 2004 reenlistment and to show that he reenlisted after he deployed to Iraq and is now eligible for a tax free $15,000 bonus. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he should have been in a stop loss status and not required to reenlist. If he had not been forced to reenlist on 15 December 2004, he would have deployed to Iraq and reenlisted in theater, which would have made him eligible for the $15,000 bonus tax free. 3. The applicant provides copies of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Policy Guidance, dated 14 December 2004; Change 1 to the SRIP, dated 14 January 2005; email communications; Alert Orders; Stop Loss Message [Mobilization Order]; Reenlistment Memorandum dated 18 May 2006; and an Information Paper with enclosures [undated, unsigned]. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of the applicant's application, he was serving on active duty as a staff sergeant, pay grade E-6, in the Nebraska Army National Guard. 2. In 2004, the applicant was assigned as an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) with B Troop, 1st Squadron, 167th Armored Cavalry Regiment. 3. Message, National Guard Bureau, date/time group 251721Z November 2004, directed the Commander, 167th Armored Cavalry Regiment to alert all assigned personnel of a pending mobilization. 4. Message, Department of the Army, date/time group 250130Z November 2004, provided authorization to mobilize the forward element of the 167th Armored Cavalry Regiment effective 3 January 2005. 5. On 14 December 2004, the National Guard Bureau (NGB) announced the FY 2005 SRIP. It provided at paragraph 5i (3) for a $15,000 enlistment bonus for prior service Soldiers who contracted a 6 year enlistment. It excluded, in part, Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) Soldiers. 6. On 15 December 2004, the applicant extended his current enlistment, which ran through 21 April 2005, for 6 years. At the time he was an AGR Soldier assigned to B Troop, 1st Squadron, 167th Armored Cavalry Regiment, in Freemont, Nebraska. 7. The information paper provided by the applicant states that he was alerted on 10 January 2005 of his deployment with the 1st Squadron, 167th Armored Cavalry Regiment Forward. 8. On 15 January 2005, the NGB announced a change to the FY 2005 SRIP to include Title 32 AGR Soldiers who were mobilized on Title 10 status. The effective date of this change was 14 December 2004. 9. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the chief, Personnel Division, NGB, Arlington, Virginia. It stated that the applicant was a Title 32 AGR at the time of his extension and had been alerted about a potential deployment. The deployment alert put the applicant on a 90-day stop loss and eliminated the need to extend his contract in order to serve in [the Iraq] theater. The applicant was advised to extend his contract and did so on 15 December 2004 for a period of 6 years. On 14 January 2005, a memorandum was published by the NGB stating that, effective 14 December 2004, Title 32 AGR and Technician Soldiers serving in a Title 10 status in support of the Global War on Terrorism were eligible for reenlistment/extension bonuses. It recommended approval of the applicant's request to receive an extension bonus. 10. On 22 April 2008, the applicant concurred with the advisory opinion. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The available evidence clearly shows that AGR Soldiers who were mobilized on Title 10 status on or after 14 December 2004, were eligible for the SRIP. When the applicant extended his enlistment he was a Title 32 AGR Soldier assigned in the United States. He did not commence his deployment until some time after 10 January 2005. 2. The applicant's contention that he was "forced" to reenlist at that time is not substantiated by any available evidence. The NGB asserts, without any supporting evidence, that he was "advised" to extend even though he still had more than a year until the end of his current enlistment. 3. In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ___X ___ ___X_____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ X _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080000448 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080000448 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1