IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  26 August 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090019735 


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 payment of an Officer Candidate School (OCS) bonus in the amount of $8,000.00.

2.  The applicant states the OCS bonus was in his original contract.  However, his contract was redone with the OCS bonus removed.  He believes the OCS bonus was wrongfully removed and states he knows other officers who have been given the OCS bonus.

3.  The applicant provides his original DA Form 3286 (Statement of Understanding – Regular Army Enlistment Delay for Applicants with Prior Service or an Existing Military Service Obligation).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 March 1999.

2.  On 6 February 2003, the applicant enlisted in the USAR Control Group (Reserve Officers' Training Corps).

3.  On 6 April 2006, the applicant completed a DA Form 3286 in which he indicated he was enlisting in the Army with the options of the Officer/Warrant Officer Enlistment Program and the Incentive Enlistment Program (U.S. Army OCS Bonus).

4.  On 10 August 2006, the applicant enlisted in the Army in pay grade E-5.  In conjunction with his enlistment he executed a new DA Form 3286 in which the Incentive Enlistment Program (U.S. Army OCS Bonus) was deleted.

5.  On the date the applicant submitted his request to the ABCMR, he was serving on active duty as a first lieutenant.

6.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Department of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1.  The advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request.  He stated the applicant did, in fact, sign an enlistment contract for the OCS bonus on 6 April 2006.  However, in April 2006 the Army determined it did not have the authority to offer the OCS bonus.  As a result, contracts for applicants who had not yet begun basic training were renegotiated to eliminate the unauthorized OCS bonus.  The advisory official states the applicant's contract was renegotiated to delete the OCS bonus.  At that time the applicant had the choice to accept the modified contract or to decline enlistment in the Army.

7.  The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion and submitted a response.  In his response he stated that he attended basic combat training in 1999 and that another officer he knows who was wrongfully denied the OCS bonus was later given the bonus.  The applicant concludes that based on the precedent of his fellow officer's case and the clear language of the directive which established the OCS bonus, he is entitled to the bonus.  In the applicant's response he includes Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 05-089, dated 12 April 2005, which implemented the OCS bonus for the Army.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the applicant executed a contract in which he was promised an OCS bonus, based on a legal interpretation, it was determined that bonus could not be legally offered.

2.  Therefore, the applicant's contract was properly modified to remove the OCS bonus.  The applicant had a choice of accepting the modified contract or not enlisting in the Army.  He chose to accept the modified contract.

3.  The MILPER message which erroneously offered the OCS bonus cited by the applicant has been noted.  However, that message was later determined to offer a bonus which the Army could not legally offer.  Therefore, it does not establish the basis for granting the applicant's request.

4.  As for the other officer who received an OCS bonus, the facts of that case are unknown.  However, the ABCMR does not establish precedent.  The ABCMR is administrative and not legal.  Every case considered by the ABCMR is considered on its own merits.  In this case, the applicant's request is not found to have merit.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ____X___  ___X____  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ______________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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100009632



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090019735



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1