IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002644 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 IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002644 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 voiding his one-year extension dated 4 March 2012, and create a contract to show he reenlisted for 6 years on 4 March 2012, and contracted for the Student Loan Repayment Plan in the amount of $50,000.00. _____________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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002644 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 an exception to policy (ETP) for retroactive entitlement for the Student Loan Repayment Plan (SLRP) due to an injustice and an error made by his previous unit. 2. The applicant states, in effect: a. He enlisted in the California Army National Guard (CAARNG) on 2 March 2007. b. In February 2012, he requested a 6-year contract extension in order to be eligible for the SLRP bonus. c. At the time of the request, he was fully eligible to receive the SLRP; however, his unit told him the system was not accepting his contract. d. He was told by his noncommissioned officer (NCO) that the State told him the Information Management and Reporting Center (IMARC) was not accepting his request because he was going into the Officer Candidate School (OCS). Additionally, the NCO told him that he needed to wait until he completed OCS and commissioned as a second lieutenant (2LT) in order to receive his SLRP. Therefore, he could only sign an extension for 12 months. e. In July 2013, he received his commission as a 2LT. Upon his transfer to his new unit, he contacted his career counselor to apply for the SLRP, but was told that since he was now a commissioned officer, he was disqualified to receive an SLRP bonus. f. He explained the situation to his new career counselor that before he was commissioned, he met all the requirements for the SLRP incentive and was told he had to wait until he was commissioned. Therefore, his career counselor assisted the applicant in submitting an ETP for his SLRP. However, his ETP request was still denied due to not meeting all the requirements. g. He was a good Soldier in good standing with his unit and he trusted his NCO to guide him in order to get his SLRP. 3. The applicant provides: * DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 4 April 2012 * an email from the CAARNG, dated 22 October 2013 * Department of the Army (DA) and the Air Force Joint Force Headquarters, Office of the Adjutant General CAARNG memorandum, Subject: Second Review Request for ETP for SLRP, dated 21 January 2016 * DA Forms 67-10-1 (Company Grade Plate Officer Evaluation Report) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. On 2 March 2007, the applicant’s records show he enlisted in the CAARNG for a period of 6 years, in the rank of specialist (SPC)/E-4. There is nothing in his DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States) or in his NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex E to DD Form 4), that reflects he was qualified and/or received an SLRP incentive. However, he did enlist as a non-prior service applicant, was in a duty military occupational specialty qualified (DMOSQ) position 13D (Field Artillery Automated Tactical Data System Specialist), and receive a Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) bonus of $20,000.00. 3. A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 16 December 2011 shows he was coded as a 09S1O for the purpose of attending OCS, effective 4 October 2011. 4. In February 2012, the applicant submitted a request for a 6-year contract extension in order to be eligible for the SLRP bonus; however, his request was rejected in the iMARC system. The applicant claims that his NCO told him that the reason his request was not accepted was because he was not eligible for the SLRP until he completed OCS; however, he could extend for one year in the CAARNG. 5. On 4 March 2012, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4836 requesting an extension for one year in the CAARNG, and it was approved. 6. Orders 210-1032, issued by the CAARNG, dated 29 July 2013, announced the appointment of the applicant as a 2LT, effective 26 July 2013. 7. On 22 October 2013, the applicant received an email from the CAARNG, SFC D____ E. P_____, stating, “per our conversation, you were MOSQ as a 13D on 4 March and were in your 365 day ETS window and should have been eligible for a six year SLRP [reenlistment bonus] REB. I am assuming that MSG K___ attempted to input your extension bonus request in iMarc and it would not produce an SLRP contract for you. It is impossible to go back in time and duplicate why iMarc would not allow the generation of a contract.” 8. The applicant provides a memorandum from the Joint Force Headquarters, Office of the Adjutant General, CAARNG which denied his request for an ETP for the SLRP; an evaluation report; and his one-year extension contract. 9. The CAARNG issued a memorandum dated 2 May 2016, by the State Retention Officer, stating: * he advised the applicant that at the time he extended his enlistment contract on 4 March 2012, he would have been fully eligible for the SLRP bonus * he was within his ETS window of 1 March 2013, was enlisted, in a Troop Program Unit (TPU), a modification table of organization and equipment (MTOE) unit, and was DMOSQ as a 13D primary position holder * for whatever reason, his unit was unable to produce a 6 year SLRP contract in iMARC * the applicant was given bad advice by his unit that he could extend later to receive SLRP. At some point during his extension, the applicant became commissioned thus negating his opportunity to extend for SLRP 10. The memorandum from the Joint Force Headquarters, Office of the Adjutant General, CAARNG, Subject: Second Review Request for ETP, dated 21 January 2016, states an ETP to award a retroactive $50,000.00 SLRP was denied to the applicant since: * he did not sign a 6-year SLRP agreement during his enlistment * he reenlisted for only one year, not six as required by regulation * Army Regulation 135-7 (Incentive Programs), paragraph 1-6 states, “Retroactive entitlement…is not authorized” REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) provides that the Board begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 2. An NGB Memorandum, dated 25 July 2011, subject: Army National Guard (ARNG) SRIP for Fiscal Year 2011, provides policy to those entering or serving in a traditional status in the ARNG effective 1 August 2011. 3. Paragraph 17 provides the eligibility criteria for the SLRP incentive. It states, in pertinent part: * the date Soldiers sign their initial enlistment or extension agreement establishes the SLRP anniversary date (month), unless adjusted for periods of authorized non-availability * applicant for the SLRP must sign a minimum 6 year service obligation at the time of enlistment, reenlistment, or extension * prior service applicant and current ARNG members must be DMOSQ at the time of enlistment, reenlistment, or extension * enlisted Soldiers who enter a commissioned program and/or accept an appointment or commission as an officer or warrant officer in the selected reserves (SELRES), may continue to receive SLRP payments as stipulated in their original contract as long as they remain otherwise qualified * SLRP extensions are not authorized for officers who contracted for this incentive as enlisted applicants * individuals who transfer from the USAR to the ARNG will continue to receive the SLRP 4. To be eligible for the SLRP incentive, a person must contractually obligate himself or herself to serve satisfactorily, must serve in a Reserve unit for a full term of the contractual agreement, and must further obligate himself or herself to continue to serve in the same component and the same MOS unless excused for the convenience of the government. Each completed satisfactory year of service performed under this SLRP agreement establishes an anniversary date. Any qualifying loan that is at least 1 year old may then be paid in accordance with the terms of this educational enlistment incentive. 5. Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the law which governs the operation of the Board, states that “The Secretary may pay, from applicable current appropriations, a claim for the loss of pay, allowances, compensation, emoluments, or other pecuniary benefits, or the repayment of a fine or forfeiture, if, as a result of correcting a record under this section, the amount is found to be due the claimant on account of his or another’s service in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps or Coast Guard, as the case may be.” DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests a correction of his military records to show he was authorized the SLRP incentive. 2. The available evidence shows the applicant contracted for the SRIP incentive at the time of his enlistment in 2007. His contract was for a SRIP incentive only for $20,000.00, which he received. 3. In 2012, before the applicant became commissioned, he was authorized SLRP and should have been allowed to sign a 6 year enlistment contract. However, it appears that his NCO gave him bad advice and only allowed him to sign an extension for one year vice a 6 year contract, and told him he could reenlist later after OCS for SLRP. 4. In October 2013, the applicant contacted the CAARNG regarding his SLRP. The point of contact at the CAARNG provided an email, essentially stating that the applicant was, in fact, authorized for SLRP, but did not know why iMARC could not or did not produce a contract for him. 5. Once the applicant became a commissioned officer, he was no longer eligible for SLRP. Although he applied for an ETP for the SLRP, it was denied. 6. Notwithstanding the applicant’s second denial for an ETP, the State Retention Manager supported his contention that he was given bad advice, was fully eligible for the SLRP at the time of his extension, and should have been allowed to reenlist for 6 years. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002644 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002644 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2