IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 May 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100000423 


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 that his 3-year Registered Nurse Incentive Special Pay (RN ISP) contract be renegotiated to a 4-year contract.

2.  The applicant states he signed a 3-year RN ISP contract in 2007 since he planned to retire in 2010.  However, after he signed the contract a law was passed which allowed for the transfer of Post 9-11 GI Bill education benefits.  Due to the requirements for transferring his education benefits, he has decided to remain on active duty.

3.  The applicant continues that he is the Chief of Perioperative Nursing Services at a military hospital and his decisions will impact the future of perioperative nursing services at his activity.

4.  The applicant provides his RN ISP contract, a proposed renegotiated RN ISP contract, his Officer Record Brief (ORB), and an Officer Evaluation Report.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's ORB shows his basic active service date as 21 August 1990.

2.  The applicant's military records show that on 14 September 2007, the applicant (then a captain) executed a 3-year RN ISP contract in which he agreed to remain on active duty as a nurse for 3 years in exchange for an incentive of $15,000 a year (a total of $45,000).

3.  The proposed renegotiated RN ISP contract submitted by the applicant is a 
4-year contract wherein he agrees to remain on active duty as a nurse for
4 years in exchange for an incentive of $20,000 a year (a total of $80,000).

4.  Department of Veterans Affairs guidance on Post 9-11 GI Bill specifies that in order to qualify for transfer of his Post 9-11 GI Bill benefits, any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted) on or after August 1, 2009: 

   a.  Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the Armed Forces from the date of election; 
   
   b.  Has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or selected reserve) on the date of election, is precluded by either standard policy or statute from committing to 4 additional years, and agrees to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute; or 
   
   c.  Is or becomes retirement eligible during the period 1 August 2009 through 1 August 2013.  A service member is considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has completed 20 years of active duty or 20 qualifying years of Reserve service. 
   
        (1)  For those individuals eligible for retirement on 1 August 2009, no additional service is required. 
   
        (2)  For those individuals who have an approved retirement date after 1 August 2009 and before 1 July 2010, no additional service is required. 
   
        (3)  For those individuals eligible for retirement after 1 August 2009 and before 1 August 2010, 1 year of additional service after approval of transfer is required. 
   
        (4)  For those individuals eligible for retirement on or after 1 August 2010 and before 1 August 2011, 2 years of additional service after approval of transfer are required. 
   
        (5)  For those individuals eligible for retirement on or after 1 August 2011 and before 1 August 2012, 3 years of additional service after approval of transfer are required.

5.  In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG).  The OTSG stated that currently the effective date of an RN ISP contract is the date of signature.  Because of that requirement, and in order to maintain consistency and fairness to all, the OTSG cannot support changes in RN ISP contracts.

6.  The OTSG adds that to approve the applicant's request would be giving him an additional $35,000 ($80,000 for the renegotiated contract at $20,000 a year versus the $45,000 he was paid under his existing RN ISP contract).  The OTSG adds that if the applicant desires to remain on active duty for an additional year, he can execute a $5,000 1-year RN ISP contract.

7.  The applicant was provided the advisory opinion and submitted a rebuttal.  In that rebuttal he stated that he is requesting the correction of the terms of his RN ISP contract because of Post 9-11 G.I. Bill benefits, not because of a change in his personal retirement plans.  The guidelines for transferring education benefits were not put out until approximately 2 years after he signed his RN ISP contract, he could not anticipate the requirements for transferring his benefits when he signed his contract.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Contrary to the applicant's contention, he is requesting this correction because of a change in his personal retirement plans.  He could retire as planned without this correction.  However, his retirement plans changed after a provision of law was established to allow him to transfer his education benefits, an option he obviously wants to exercise.

2.  The applicant executed a valid 3-year RN ISP contract.  He does not dispute this fact.  

3.  Essentially, since the applicant can execute a 1-year RN ISP contract to collect additional RN ISP, what is at issue is the amount of money he will receive.  If the Board does not change the applicant's RN ISP contract, the applicant will receive a total of $50,000 in incentive pay ($45,000 for his 3-year contract and $5,000 for a 1-year contract).  If the Board grants the applicant's request he will receive $80,000, a difference of $30,000.

4.  While it is understandable that the applicant would like an additional $30,000, that desire does not establish an error or injustice in his military records.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.


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)                                         AR20100000423



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)