BOARD DATE: 21 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002243 BOARD VOTE: ____x____ ___x_____ ____x____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 21 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002243 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing she was granted an exception to policy to retain the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) incentive in accordance with the terms of her service agreement. _____________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. BOARD DATE: 21 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002243 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 her records to show she was approved for an exception to policy (ETP), allowing her to retain her eligibility for the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) incentive. 2. The applicant states: a. She signed a contract with the Virginia Army National Guard (VAARNG) on 11 October 2010 as an 09S (Commissioned Officer Candidate), allowing her to receive the SLRP incentive in the amount of $37,000. The incentive was to be paid in six installments after each year of honorable service. She reported in January 2011, and served the past 5 years honorably without ever missing a drill weekend or period of annual training. She submitted all of the necessary loan repayment paperwork at the end of each year. The VAARNG has paid $9,000 towards her student loans as of 7 January 2016. b. She received an email on 6 January 2016 from the State Loan Officer stating the National Guard Bureau (NGB) had disapproved her ETP because she was offered the SLRP incentive under the 09S option on 11 October 2010, which wasn't an available option at the time she executed her contract. As a civilian, she entrusted her future to the VAARNG recruiter. She was not aware that the recruiter did not know the proper regulations nor that she was signing a contract that was incongruent with Army Regulations. If she had been told by the recruiter that she did not qualify on 11 October 2010, she would have waited until after 19 October 2010, 8 days later, to sign her contract. She has honorably fulfilled her obligation, but 5 years after the fact, the NGB is not fulfilling its obligation. If there were so many discrepancies, the NGB should have informed her in the first year, after she submitted her first annual request for SLRP payment. Instead they made payments to her account. c. She has just completed her fifth year of honorable service and was under the impression that her student loan would be repaid in full by October 2016, her 6th anniversary. If the three discrepancies are reviewed, it will be seen that all errors that occurred were made by the recruiter. She graduated the Virginia Officer Candidate School in October 2012; she was the first female honor graduate. Upon reporting to the 1710th Transportation Company, she served as the Rear Detachment Commander and received an Army Commendation Medal for her performance. She has been rated as a top lieutenant in the battalion on her Officer Evaluation Reports. She is not asking for any change above what the NGB agreed to in her contract. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of her request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following prior enlisted service in the Regular Army, the applicant enlisted in the VAARNG on 11 October 2010. 3. In conjunction with her enlistment, the applicant executed and signed an NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex L to DD Form 4 – SLRP Addendum – ARNG of the United States (ARNGUS)), wherein she verified she was eligible for the SLRP in the maximum amount of $50,000.00. She acknowledged, in pertinent part: a. Section II (Eligibility): (1) "I am a Prior Service applicant enlisting or current member Reenlisting/Extending in a MTOE/AVCRAD/RTI/SF or Medical TDA unit WTHFA1 (UIC). I am DMOS qualified for the position and enlisting/reenlisting/ extending for a term of service of not less than 6 years in the Army National Guard of the United States." She placed her initials in this section. (2) She had 1 disbursed loan existing in the amount of $30,839. She understood the total amount of repayment for qualifying loan(s) will not exceed $50,000. b. Section VI (Statement of Understanding): She understood that SLRP would continue if she either accepted an appointment as an officer or warrant officer candidate, or if she contracted as an Simultaneous Membership Program/Reserve Officer Training Corps Program Cadet. It would also continue upon acceptance of either a commission or appointment as an officer or warrant officer in the ARNG. 4. The applicant was honorably discharged from the VAARNG on 26 October 2012, for appointment as a commissioned or warrant officer. 5. The applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army on 27 October 2012. She was appointed in the rank of second lieutenant for service in the VAARNG. She was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant on 27 April 2014. 6. A memorandum from the Chief, Personnel Programs, Resources and Manpower Division, NGB, dated 19 December 2015, shows an ETP request on the applicant's behalf was denied, stating, in pertinent part: * an ETP to retain the $50,000 SLRP was disapproved because the applicant received a specific SLRP program (09S SLRP) that was not authorized on the contract date, in violation of ARNG Chaplain, Health Professional and Enlisted Loan Repayment Programs (CHELRP) * the bonus control number (BCN) was requested after the date of enlistment, in violation of ARNG CHELRP * the SLRP addendum was obsolete, in violation of ARNG CHELRP * the State Incentive Manager was directed to terminate the incentive without recoupment effective the contract start date REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 135-7 (Incentive Programs) restricts the SLRP to those Reserve Component members who either enlist or reenlist for a skill or unit approved by the Department of the Army and disseminated to the field by a list of MOSs and units, which is updated every 6 months. This educational incentive may only be elected at the time of enlistment or reenlistment. This incentive pays a limited sum of money to a lending institution on the anniversary date of an enlistment or reenlistment. These payments continue on a yearly basis unless the Soldier loses eligibility by being separated from his or her unit. 2. National Guard Regulation 600-7 (Selected Reserve (SELRES) Incentive Programs) governs incentive policies, procedures, and eligibility criteria for persons entering into an incentive agreement. a. Paragraph 1-21 (14) states, enlisted Soldiers who enter an authorized commissioning program as a non-scholarship recipient and/or accept an appointment or commission as an officer or warrant officer in a SELRES may continue to receive SLRP payments as stipulated in their original contract so long as they remain otherwise qualified. b. The applicant must have an incentive written agreement with a valid bonus control number on the addenda approved through the incentive management system. The SLRP addendum is valid only when the control numbers are generated by the incentive management system on the date of enlistment, re-enlistment/extension, or within the authorized number of days stipulated by current fiscal year policy prior to affiliation into the ARNG. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's request for correction of her records to show she was approved for an ETP, which would allow her to retain her eligibility for the SLRP incentive, was carefully considered. 2. The applicant enlisted in the VAARNG on 11 October 2010. On that date, she was offered the SLRP incentive and accepted the incentive offer made in good faith. She was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer on 27 October 2012 and continues to serve. 3. An ETP request on the applicant's behalf was submitted and denied by the NGB for accepting an incentive that was not an option at the time of contracting, a BCN that was requested after the date of enlistment, and an obsolete SLRP addendum. 4. The evidence of record shows a BCN was issued and the applicant received $9,000 in payment towards her student loan. The State Incentive Manager is responsible for validating BCNs. A service representative verified and acknowledged that the applicant met all requirements as outlined in the bonus addendum on the date of her enlistment. The applicant would have had no way of knowing that her SLRP addendum was obsolete when she accepted the incentive offered. The evidence indicates that denial of an ETP allowing her to retain the SLRP incentive is contrary to equity and against the best interests of the Army. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002243 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002243 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2