PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           13 May 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076592

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Mr. Lawrence Foster		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that he be paid a broken service selective reenlistment bonus (BSSRB).  In effect, he is asking that his enlistment contract be honored.

3. The applicant states that he was promised a BSSRB by his recruiter in return for his enlistment in the Regular Army in military occupational specialty (MOS) 12B, Combat Engineer.  After reporting for duty, he was informed that he was not entitled to the BSSRB.

4.  The applicant served on active duty as a Combat Engineer for 4 years from 21 September 1990 through 20 September 1994.  Upon his release from active duty, he served in the active US Army Reserve (USAR) from September 1994 to October 1999.

5.  On 7 December 1999, the applicant reenlisted in pay grade E-4 for a period of 3 years and for the following incentives:  assignment in MOS 12B; assignment to Fort Lewis, Washington; and a BSSRB (with the exact amount of the bonus determined after the applicant arrived at Fort Lewis).

6.  On an unknown date, the applicant was informed that he did not qualify for a BSSRB.  He attempted to obtain the bonus without success.  In late 2000, he contacted his Representative in Congress, who made an inquiry on the applicant's behalf.  On 16 November 2000, the US Army Recruiting Command responded to the Congressional inquiry by stating that the applicant was erroneously promised a BSSRB, but did not qualify.  The Member of Congress was further informed that the applicant could get out of the Army "based on an unfulfilled enlistment contract or he can choose to accept his enlistment without the BSSRB."

7.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Retention Management Division, which opined that the applicant had been improperly informed that he would receive a BSSRB because he was not eligible and did not meet the criteria for entitlement to a BSSRB.  The PERSCOM further opined that the applicant would have had to have served in the Regular Army (RA) previously; that his most recent separation must have been from the RA; that he must have previously served continuously for 17 months; that he must have attained the pay grade of E-4 at the time of his previous separation from the RA; and that he must have a cumulative total of at least 6 years when added to his new term of enlistment. The PERSCOM recommended that his request for payment of a BSSRB be denied.  The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and, to date, no response has been received. 

8.  United States Army Recruiting Command message number 00-002, dated 7 January 2000, announced changes to the SRB and BSSRB programs.  It provides, in pertinent part, that changes were implemented on 10 January 2000, which added or increased SRB Multipliers to the BSSRB program.  MOS 12B was authorized an SRB of 1A/0 for enlistment in the minimum pay grade of E-4.  It also indicates that prior service applicants must enlist under primary option #18 with associated option code of #470 (SRB) or #471 (BSSRB). 

9.  Army Regulation 601-210 governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 3, Section V, (Broken Service Selective Reenlistment Bonus) prescribes instructions for preparation, record maintenance, and financial administration for BSSRB recipients.  

CONCLUSIONS: 

1.  The applicant was enlisted with the promise of receiving a BSSRB.  At the time of enlistment, he was married with a family.  Based in part on the promise of a monetary bonus, he left civilian life and reentered the RA; he left his job and he moved his family from Tennessee to Fort Lewis.  After arriving at Fort Lewis, he learned that he was not eligible for the BSSRB and, approximately 1 year after enlisting, he learned through his Representative in Congress that he could either accept the fact that he would not receive a BSSRB, or leave the Army and go back to Tennessee.

2.  The applicant was not treated in a fair and equitable manner.  The applicant clearly did not meet the established regulatory criteria for the BSSRB; however, the Army recruiter who enlisted him should have known that he did not meet the criteria and should have so advised him.  Likewise, the recruiting officials who review contracts should have discovered the error and resolved it prior to the applicant's reporting for active duty.  Because the applicant gave up his civilian career, moved his family 2,300 miles, and met in full his enlistment obligations, the Army should honor the promises made to the applicant in his enlistment contract by awarding him the BSSRB as an exception to policy.  Under these specific circumstances, voiding the enlistment contract is not a fair or realistic option; it would leave the applicant at a serious disadvantage.

3.  Notwithstanding the PERSCOM advisory opinion, the Board recommends that, as an exception to policy, the applicant be paid the BSSRB at the minimum rate necessary to qualify for payment of the BSSRB under the criteria in effect at the time, without regard to his current grade, prior service status, or time in service. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that, as an exception to policy,  the individual concerned is authorized payment of a BSSRB for his 3-year enlistment of 7 December 1999 in MOS 12B, under the minimum criteria necessary to qualify for that payment. 

BOARD VOTE:  

__mkp___  __tsk___  __lf____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Margaret K. Patterson
				______________________
					        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076592	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030513	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	112.1100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.