IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160009016 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: 7 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160009016 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 authorizing the applicant to retain the Student Loan Repayment Program incentive. __________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: 7 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160009016 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 correction of his records to show he is qualified to retain the $50,000 incentive under the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) he contracted for with the Oregon Army National Guard (ORARNG). 2. The applicant states: a. He enlisted into the ORARNG in June 2010. He was awarded the SLRP per his contract. He has only received about $4,000 to date, and he was denied any further payment. In addition, he was told he would have to pay back the $4,000. b. On 29 June 2010, he was enlisted into the ORARNG. He signed his SLRP contract on 30 June 2010 because he was unavailable the day of his enlistment. He was recruited in McMinnville, Oregon, by Sergeant First Class (SFC) G______ A. S____. He moved to Eugene, Oregon, and started a new job with the Coburg Police Department the week before his enlistment was finalized. Therefore, he was not available during business hours the entire week of 29 June 2010. c. The main reason his contract was not finalized the day he committed to the ORARNG was because SFC S____ needed to be sure he qualified for the SLRP. SFC S____ told him the program was only authorized for Soldiers who were military occupational specialty (MOS) qualified. He previously served in the United States Marine Corps (USMC), and SFC S____ believed his USMC MOS would transfer over to the Army and thus qualify him for the SLRP. His USMC MOS was 0411 (Maintenance Management Clerk). The 0411 MOS is similar to the Army MOS 92A (Automated Logistical Specialist). A few days later SFC S____ notified him the USMC MOS would transfer to the Army MOS and his enlistment contract and all conditions were approved and it was ready for him to sign. He was unavailable on 29 June 2010, but he did sign the contract on 30 June 2010. The contract stated he was awarded the SLRP. d. He was notified in 2012 that his loan repayment was denied because SFC S____ did not sign the correct page of the contract and he signed the day after the enlistment date. Chief Warrant Officer Four B____ wrote on 8 November 2012, "OC Lee was not aware it was against policy to sign the SLRP contract one day after his enlistment date, and should not be penalized for the admin error." He felt it was in the best interest of the ARNG to approve an exception to policy (ETP). e. He was not made aware until 11 October 2013 that his USMC MOS did not transfer to the Army MOS. That was over 3 years after he enlisted. In addition, he received one payment in 2013 that was applied to his student loans. f. He signed a 6-year contract with the belief he was eligible for the SLRP. He previously requested the Board to award him the loan repayment. The Board stated he failed to exhaust all recourses within the State. He requested the National Guard Bureau (NGB) review his case. 3. The applicant provides copies of a 23 July 2015 ORARNG memorandum requesting an ETP and a 19 October 2015 ORARNG ETP denial memorandum. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following prior service in the USMC, the applicant enlisted in the ORARNG on 29 June 2010 for a period of 6 years as a sergeant/E-5. 2. A DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States) shows the applicant; SFC S____, the Service Representative; and Captain(CPT) J___ M. M_____ each signed the form using the date of 29 June 2010. 3. An SLRP Addendum completed in conjunction with his 29 June 2010 enlistment shows in: a. Section II (Eligibility), item 2c he indicated he had three disbursed loans in the amount of $36,622.08 and the total amount of repayment for qualifying loan(s) would not exceed $50,000. b. Section VII (Authentication) the applicant's signature is dated 30 June 2010; the service representative signed the form, but his signature is not dated. 4. A bonus control number is included on each page of the Addendum. 5. In a 23 July 2015 memorandum, subject: Request ETP for Contracting SLRP while Non Duty MOS Qualified (DMOSQ) with an Obsolete Addendum, the Commander, 3670th Maintenance Company, requested an ETP for the applicant. She stated: a. The applicant was informed by SFC S____ that his USMC MOS was converted to MOS 92A making him eligible for the SLRP. b. The applicant and SFC S____ unknowingly signed an obsolete SLRP Addendum, dated March 2009, for the applicant's 29 June 2010 enlistment. A new SLRP Addendum, dated 1 October 2009, came into effect 23 February 2010. SFC S____ was not aware that the SLRP Addendum used for the reenlistment was obsolete. c. The applicant honestly believed he was DMOSQ for his contract and he believed his SLRP contract was accurate. He was not a fault for the administrative errors and it is in the best interests for the ARNG to approve the ETP. 6. In a Joint Force Headquarters, Oregon National Guard memorandum, subject: Request ETP for Contracting for the SLRP Non-DMSQ and for Signing an Obsolete SLRP Addendum Form, dated 19 October 2015, the Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel, requested a "second look" at the applicant's ETP request and noted: a. An initial ETP was approved for the applicant concerning his SLRP for various administrative violations of the SRIP (Selected Reserve Incentive Programs) policy, but later, while processing his payments, NGB identified he signed an obsolete addendum. He enlisted non-DMOSQ for the SLRP, which is in violation of the SRIP policy. b. A second ETP request was denied because he did not provide requested additional information in a timely manner. c. He has now provided a letter in which he explains how his recruiter informed him that his USMC MOS of 0411 qualified him for MOS 92A. He states he was unaware that he enlisted into the ORARNG non-DMOSQ, or that he signed an obsolete SLRP addendum. d. He did transfer into the Officer Candidate School (OCS) program shortly after his enlistment, but then transferred back to his unit where he became DMOSQ in MOS 91H. e. It would be in the best interests of the ARNG to approve the ETP. 7. In an 11 October 2013 memorandum Colonel (COL) D____ R. Z___, Deputy G1, ARNG denied the second review request for an ETP to retain the SLRP. a. The memorandum reveals: (1) He was not duty MOS qualified (DMOSQ) for the contracted incentive. (2) His contract/bonus addendum was obsolete. (3) His incentive addendum contained a missing signature date from the Service Representative, and a missing signature and a signature date from the Witnessing Officer. b. The memorandum further indicated the applicant enlisted in the ORARNG as a prior service applicant on 29 June 2010 for the SLRP incentive and signed the SLRP addendum on 30 June 2010. Although the DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) shows he enlisted for the SLRP and to serve in MOS 92A, he was not DMOSQ for MOS 92A. He was transferred from MOS 09S (Officer Candidate) to MOS 91H (Track Vehicle Repairer) effective 7 August 2013. He became DMOSQ on 7 August 2013 per DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report). c. Failure of the applicant to enlist DMOSQ as a Prior Service Applicant for SLRP is a violation of DoD Directive 1205.21 (Reserve Component Incentive Programs Procedures) paragraph E8.1.1.3, and the SLRP incentive is required to be invalidated. 8. His record contains a copy of Orders 221-009, Joint Force Headquarters, Oregon National Guard, dated 9 August 2013, showing he was awarded primary MOS 91H (Track Vehicle Repairer) effective 7 August 2013. REFERENCES: 1. NGB Education Division Instruction 1.1, dated 1 October 2009, contains all policy and procedural guidance for all loan repayment programs for the ARNG. This instruction supersedes all other policy and procedural guidance on the SLRP (now known as the ELRP), the Health Professional Loan Repayment Program and the Chaplain Loan Repayment Program. The combined loan repayment program is now known as the CHELRP. Paragraph 4-2 (Termination) states an incentive will be terminated if a Soldier moves to another MOS or is reclassified in an MOS other than that for which contracted. 2. Department of Defense Instruction Number 1205.21 prescribes policy and procedures for management of the Reserve components incentive programs to include the SLRP. Paragraph E8.1.1.3 states if enlisting, reenlisting or extending for eligibility under the SLRP, the Soldier must currently hold that specialty or, if enlisting, shall meet critical skill qualification on completion of initial active duty training, and agree to serve the entire enlistment in that critical skill unless removed for the convenience of the Government. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant entered into a contract with the understanding that he was entitled to and would receive the SLRP incentive. 2. The SLRP Addendum was signed by the appropriate official and is filed in his Official Military Personnel File. There is sufficient evidence available to show the applicant believed he would receive the SLRP that he was promised. He was not at fault for the administrative errors that resulted in the denial of his SLRP incentive. 3. However, there is no evidence of record, and the applicant failed to provide evidence showing he ever became DMOSQ or served in the contracted MOS. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160009016 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160009016 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2