BOARD DATE: 15 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007382 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: 15 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007382 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 and State Army National Guard records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing an exception to policy was approved allowing the applicant to retain the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) incentive in accordance with the terms set forth in her SLRP addendum. __________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: 15 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007382 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) to retain eligibility for the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) incentive. 2. The applicant states, in effect, she wanted to relocate to Michigan for personal reasons. She talked with a recruiter to assist her with finding a unit in Michigan. She was told her current military occupational specialty (MOS) was not available; however, there was an opening for a 42A (Human Resource Specialist). She was told she could do an ETP and it would not affect her SLRP incentive. She accepted the position; however, her ETP was denied. 3. The applicant provides two letters of support, a self-authored statement, orders, an enlistment contract, and an ETP denial memorandum from the National Guard Bureau (NGB). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 3 October 2013, the applicant enlisted in the Tennessee Army National Guard (ARNG). 2. In conjunction with her enlistment she completed Annex L (SLRP Addendum – ARNG of the United States). Annex L explained the obligation and participation requirements for entitlement under the SLRP. She indicated or acknowledged she understood she was a non-prior service member enlisting as follows for a term of service of not less than 6 years in the ARNG. * Unit Identification Code (UIC): WQBSHD * Unit: 1130 Finance Detachment Rear, Nashville, TN * MOS: 36B1O (Financial Management Technician) (Critical Skill Vacancy) * Paragraph/Line Number (Para/Line): 104/03 3. The SLRP addendum stated that eligibility would be terminated if she voluntarily change her MOS during the contractual obligation. 4. After completing her initial active duty training she was awarded MOS 36B. On 21 September 2015, she completed an NGB Form 22-5 (Addendum to DD Form 4 – Approval and Acceptance by Service Representative for Inter-State Transfer (IST) in the ARNG). This document shows she voluntarily requested an IST to the State of Michigan. 5. Orders 281-806, issued by Joint Forces Headquarters, Nashville, TN, dated 8 October 2015, show she was transferred from the 1130th Finance Detachment, Nashville, TN, to Headquarters and Headquarters Company 1225th SSB, Detroit, MI, effective 14 September 2015. She was assigned in MOS 42A. 6. In a memorandum to the Michigan ARNG, dated 26 March 2016, the NGB denied the ETP for the applicant to retain the $50,000 SLRP and stated the State Incentive Manager would terminate the incentive with recoupment effective the date of transfer from the contracted MOS. The NGB official stated, in part, the ETP was disapproved because the applicant voluntarily transferred out of the contracted MOS and this violated Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 1205.21, paragraph 6.6.2. REFERENCES: 1. DODI 1205.21 prescribes policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes procedures for management of the Reserve Component incentive programs. It states in Section 6.6 (Relief from Termination), persons who move from one location to another may continue incentive eligibility if they remain in the Selected Reserve of the same Military Department and are assigned to an incentive-eligible unit or incentive eligible critical skill, as appropriate. 2. Memorandum, subject: Update 4 to the ARNG Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14), issued by NGB, dated 14 October 2015, lists 42A as an authorized enlisted affiliation critical MOS. DISCUSSION: 1. On 21 September 2015, the applicant requested an IST. Her request was approved and she was transferred to a unit in MI. She was assigned MOS 42A. 2. Memorandum, subject: Update 4 to the ARNG Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14), issued by NGB, dated 14 October 2015, lists 42A as an authorized enlisted affiliation critical MOS. 3. Governing regulation provides that persons who move from one location to another may continue incentive eligibility if they remain in the Selected Reserve of the same Military Department and are assigned to an incentive-eligible unit or incentive-eligible critical skill, as appropriate. The evidence shows the applicant remained in an incentive-eligible critical skill after her IST to Michigan. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160007382 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160007382 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2