| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Mr. Lawrence Foster | Member |
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. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080230C070215
In so doing, they stated that the applicant’s MOS (98C) did not qualify for a BSSRB and offered that he could request separation based on an unfulfilled enlistment contract. PERSCOM again stated that the applicant could request separation based on an unfulfilled enlistment contract. The applicant met his enlistment obligations in full and the Army should honor the promise made to the applicant in his enlistment contract by awarding him the BSSRB as an exception to policy.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | AR20050018310C070206
Scott Faught | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant was also advised that he could request separation for an unfulfilled enlistment contract. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program, provides that prior service applicants last separated from an active duty component and who were separated 91 days to 4 years earlier and hold an MOS with appropriate skill level...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004551C070206
Allen L. Raub | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The opinion stated the applicant reenlisted as an E-4 for 3 years in MOS 11B on 1 February 2005. When the applicant enlisted in the DEP on 1 December 2004, his recruiter told him he qualified for the BSSRB and included that enlistment option on the applicant's contract.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014819
The applicant's records show he initially enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years on 8 July 1983. He subsequently completed a USAREC Form 1150-R-E (Statement of Understanding-Army Policy), indicating that his enlistment was in the grade of E-4 and that he enlisted for the broken service selective reenlistment bonus (BSSRB) incentive in accordance with Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) Military Personnel Message 01-199, dated 5 July 2001 for MOS 96B for 3 years. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017668
The opinion stated: * The applicants enlistment contract revealed he enlisted in the RA on 7 March 2002 for MOS 11B and a $4,000.00 bonus * He was separated from the Army and reentered on 14 September 2006 * The BSSRB was listed on his reentry contract in the amount of $4,000.00 * He was never paid either bonus 4. The evidence of record shows he enlisted in the RA on 7 March 2002 for a $4,000.00 cash bonus in MOS 11X. His military pay records at DFAS confirm he has not received either his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014831
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He provides: * DA Forms 3286 (Statement for Enlistment U.S. Army Enlistment Program), dated 29 March 2006 and 7 February 2008 * DA Form 3340-R (Request for Reenlistment or Extension in the RA) * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States), dated 7 February 2008 * DA Form 4789 (Statement of Entitlement to Selective Reenlistment Bonus) * Email, dated 15 and 16...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006745C070205
The evidence of record includes the applicant's reenlistment contract of 23 June 2005, which contains a Statement of Understanding that confirms he was guaranteed the Enlistment Program/Option 9C/470, which was a broken service prior service SRB. Both these enlistment contract documents were authenticated by the guidance counselor on 23 June 2005, the date the applicant reenlisted and reentered active duty. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084393C070212
He states that his recruiter was provided the "Partnership Loan" promissory note at the time of enlistment and that his DD Form 1966/3 (Record of Military Processing-Armed Forces of the United States) shows the LRP as an included option in his enlistment contract. In connection with this application, a PERSCOM advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) stated, in essence, that as previously indicated in their 30 October 2002 correspondence provided to the applicant, terms outlined in the enlistment...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058736C070421
The applicant's military records were not provided to the Board. However, since there is no evidence that the applicant was informed that he had the option of requesting discharge, and the time to do so has expired, the Board will recommend that he now be provided that option. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by providing the individual concerned 60 days from the date of this document to request discharge as a result of his defective...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005940C070206
There is no evidence the applicant has any other loans that did qualify for payment under the provisions of the SLRP. In doing so, the applicant’s military records may be corrected to show his Statement for Enlistment – US Army Enlistment Program was amended to include the sentence, “If a student loan is accepted by the official processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify that the student loan accepted actually is eligible under the Higher...