BOARD DATE: 25 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006828 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ __x______ ___x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 25 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006828 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 25 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006828 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, in effect, correction of her military record to show that she is authorized Registered Nurse Incentive Special Pay (RNISP) for a 4-year period commencing 18 January 2016. 2. The applicant states she has exhausted all potential remedies through her chain of command. a. Colonel (COL) C_____, the delegated authority, initially disapproved her request for RNISP because she is not currently working as a perioperative nurse; therefore, she should not receive a financial incentive for maintaining the her certification. b. She believes and Human Resources Command (HRC) personnel validated that she met the requirements in the All Army Activities (ALARACT) message providing RNISP guidance, although COL C____ disagreed; c. Working primarily in the specialty receiving special pay is not a requirement of the ALARACT message, and even if so, she has only worked in positions that require her skills in specialty 66E (Perioperative Nurse), 05A (Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Immaterial), 00E (AMEDD Student), and 66N (Nurse Immaterial). d. Denial of her request may violate due process as many others are in receipt of ISP for service in branch immaterial positions or centralized selection list COL and brigade/battalion command positions. e. While she does not have knowledge of the entire AMEDD (to include Medical and Dental Corps), it is likely COL C______ approved ISP for six other officers (2 COLs and 4 lieutenant colonels (LTCs)) serving in immaterial positions while denying her request. 3. She provides: * a memorandum, subject: Letter of Endorsement for LTC E.M.V. [applicant], dated 20 March 2015 * FAQs for RNISP as detailed in ALARACT Message (4 pages) * Self-Authored Statement * ALARACT Message 365/2010 (9 pages) * Health Profession Officer Special Pay Program slides (65 pages) * Memorandum for Record, dated 27 February 2016 * 25 pages of Email communication * Memoranda, Subject: Request for Specialty RNISP, dated 7 January 2011 and 10 November 2015 * document titled “Contract Tracking Dates,” dated 17 December 2015 * ALARACT Extract * DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard) * RN Texas Board of Nursing License Card * Officer Record Brief (OER) * Credential Verification System – CNOR certification * DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of her application, the applicant was serving on active duty in the Regular Army as a LTC, Army Nurse Corps (ANC), in pay grade O-5. She serves in area of concentration 66E (Perioperative Nurse). 2. On 7 January 2011, the applicant initiated a request for RNISP for a 4-year period commencing 18 January 2012. The Chief, ANC, approved her request. 3. The applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) includes five officer evaluation reports (OER), dated between 12 June 2011 through 7 July 2016 (encompassing the 4-year RNISP period of 18 January 2012 – 17 January 2016). She served in the following positions: * Assignment Officer, ANC Branch from 12 June 2011 – 20 April 2012 * Executive Officer, Medical Recruiting Battalion from 21 April 2012 – 20 April 2013 and from 22 April 2013 – 21 April 2014 * Commander, McAfee U.S. Army Health Clinic from 22 April 2014 – 11 July 2015 and from 12 July 2015 -7 July 2016, her last received OER) 4. In a memorandum dated 20 March 2015, the Perioperative Nursing Consultant to the Army Surgeon General stated: * She was giving the applicant the highest endorsement for the RAND Arroyo Center Fellowship Program * the applicant meets the eligibility requirements for the RAND fellowship and is highly competitive based on current application guidelines * the applicant was easily in the top 5 percent of the ANC in addition to being an extremely gifted, war tested, board-certified operating room nurse * the applicant possessed strong analytical abilities as evidenced in her OERs through her superior performance in a variety of leader positions with the AMEDD and ANC * the applicant was a must select for the RAND fellowship opportunity 5. On 10 November 2015, the applicant initiated a second request for RNISP commencing 18 January 2016. The Deputy Commander for Patient Services and Nursing disapproved her request and stated: * the applicant has not worked in the perioperative arena for greater than 5 years * she is now in a command that she “opted in” for * there is no indication she will return to perioperative nursing; thus she should not be financially incentivized for maintaining a CNOR certification without concurrent practice * if she elects to return to perioperative nursing, this decision should be reconsidered 6. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, AMEDD Special Pay Branch. The opinion stated: a. The applicant is requesting a 4-year Specialty (RNISP) contract at $20,000 commencing 18 January 2016. b. The applicant indicates her RNISP contract was disapproved by the command because she was not performing duties as a perioperative nurse and she cites numerous occasions where she and others have not worked in their specialty while receiving previous RNISP contracts. c. Paragraph six of ALARACT Message 365-2010 indicates basic eligibility for RNISP contract include: * being fully qualified in specialty * credentialed to the basic standards of the specialty in accordance with Army Regulation 40-66, without prejudicial restriction of clinical privileges * possession of a full, unrestricted license or waiver * performs the duties of specialty RN for sufficient time during the contract period to allow for the full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty d. Full qualification in the specialty as a perioperative nurse requires the specialty identifier of AOC 66E, graduation from the pertinent Army Nurse Residency Program in Perioperative Nursing, plus applicable board certification. e. A review of the applicant’s documents and the available special and personnel data bases indicate she is fully qualified as a perioperative nurse. Although the applicant meets the basic eligibility of her specialty in her AOC, the reason for command disapproval is that she does not meet the ALARACT message or contract period to allow for the full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty. The command makes the decision concerning the officer’s clinical performance in the specialty, not the specialty consultant or the officer’s assignment branch. If the officer or the assignment branch chooses a different position that does not allow the applicant to perform duties of the specialty, that element of eligibility is not met and the contract may be denied by the command. 7. On 4 August 2016, the applicant provided the following rebuttal comments to the advisory opinion: a. Her previous command did not disapprove her request because she could not perform the duties of her RN specialty for sufficient time during the contract period to allow for the full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty. Her request was disapproved because she was not filling a 66E position, not a requirement of the ALARACT message. If needed, she is fully prepared to perform the duties of specialty 66E. As an example, her previous command would have deployed her to Afghanistan to serve in specialty 66E. She deployed to Iraq in 2008 after over 4 years of serving in command and student assignments proving her ability to keep her skills and certifications current if needed to execute specific 66E skills, evidenced on her deployed OER. b. Her command did not and has not pursued an AOC change because of a lack of qualifications. c. As it relates to the statement “The specialty RNISP incentivize nurses to work in that specialty” this is not a stated requirement in the ALARACT message. It is possible the Army started this program to ensure a sufficient number of these specialty nurses are available if needed for war. Contrarily, the Army can designate specialty duty assignment pay, e.g. recruiting, to a specific duty position. d. The advisory opinion indicates she filled positions that did not allow the performance of duties in the specialty. However, this is not a requirement because she only worked positions requiring the skills of AOC 66E, such as that of AOC 05A, 00E, and 66N. e. The advisory opinion does not address the issue of due process as many officers in her position received approval for RNISP. Accordingly, she requests the same opportunity to participate as her peers and superiors. REFERENCES: 1. The Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation (DODFMR), Volume 7A, chapter 21, states in order to be eligible for the ISP for nurses a person must be: a. an officer of the Nurse Corps of the Army or Navy, or an officer of the Air Force designated as a nurse; and b. be on active duty under a call or order to active duty for a period of not less than 1 year; c. a fully qualified registered nurse with an active, full unrestricted license in a designated specialty, one of which is “perioperative nursing.” d. hold a nationally recognized certification in one of the clinical nursing specialties listed above; e. have completed a specialty nursing course approved by the service Surgeon General or graduate program in one of the clinical specialties listed above; and f. execute a written agreement to remain on active duty for a period of not less than 1 year which is accepted by the Secretaries concerned. 2. The DODFMR further states the Secretaries concerned may, upon acceptance of the written agreement, pay an eligible individual incentive pay in an annual amount not to exceed: * $5,000.00 a year for a 1-year contract * $10,000.00 a year for a 2-year contract * $15,000.00 a year for a 3-year contract * $20,000.00 a year for a 4-year contract 3. ALARACT Message 365/2010, Subject: ANC ISP Policy, Plan, and Rates, prescribes the Department of the Army policy and rates governing the Nurses Corps Officer ISP and it states this pay is categorized as discretionary pay and not an entitlement. a. Paragraph 6 provides the basic eligibility criteria for RNISP and it includes the performance of specialty RN duties for sufficient time during the agreement period to allow for the full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty “as determined by the commander.” b. Paragraph 13 provides for the termination of special pay. It states all special pay agreements may be disapproved by the commander or terminated by the surgeon general for the following: * the nurse specialist officer AOC designation is removed * (individual) fails to possess a current, unrestricted license (or approved waiver) * (individual) fails to possess privileges to practice * (individual) fails to be engaged in the practice of the specialty, for which payment is made, for a sufficient time during the agreement period to allow for full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty, as determined by the commander DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends correction of her records is required to authorize RNISP for a 4-year period commencing 18 January 2016. This claim received careful consideration. 2. The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s receipt of RNISP for the period 18 January 2012 – 17 January 2016 while holding AOC 66E and performing the duties of an assignment officer, executive officer, and commander of a health clinic. As a result, she previously received RNISP for performing duties outside of her AOC, as approved by her commander at that time at his discretion. 3. The evidence of record confirms the applicant remains a fully qualified perioperative nurse in AOC 66E. However, the governing policy (ALARACT Message 365/2010) confirms ISP is discretionary pay and not an entitlement. The basic eligibility criteria for RNISP includes the performance of specialty RN duties for a sufficient time during the agreement period to allow for the full maintenance of professional skills in that specialty “as determined by the commander.” 4. Although a prior commander approved the applicant for RNISP, her current commander, likewise, at his discretion, determined not to incentivize her for primarily performing duties outside of perioperative nursing and/or during her RAND Fellowship, which is within his authority. There is no evidence of an error or injustice in the commander’s decision. 5. Finally, the commander indicates he will reconsider the applicant’s request for RNISP if she returns to perioperative nursing. She likewise indicates she is fully prepared to perform the duties of AOC 66E if necessary. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006828 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006828 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2