BOARD DATE:	  11 August 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110002021 


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 his record to show he completed his Selective Reserve obligation of 6 months and he is not subject to recoupment of the Prior Service Enlistment Bonus (PSEB). 

2.  The applicant states he received a PSEB in connection with his extension and entered active duty in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) program on 8 August 2005.  He states the extension in question was dated 6 March 2005 which is the problem.  He claims he extended at the end of January or the beginning of February 2005.  The signature on the extension in question is not his.  He claims he wants his record cleared of this matter which will cost him and his family lots of money.  

3.  The applicant provides all documents related to his debt case in support of his application.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 4 March 2005, while serving in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard (PAARNG) the applicant completed a DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment) that extended his 6 March 1998 ARNG enlistment by 6 months.  The applicant and the officer administering the oath authenticated this document with their signatures on 4 March 2005.  This document was added to the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) on 5 July 2005.  


2.  The applicant's record contains a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 
600-7-3-R-E (Annex R to DD Form 4 or DA Form 4836 Reenlistment/Extension Bonus Addendum Army National Guard of the United States) in which the applicant acknowledged he understood he would be terminated from bonus eligibility with recoupment if he accepted an AGR Title 10 or Title 32 tour prior to serving 6 months of the incentive contract.  However, recoupment would not be required if he served at least 6 months of the incentive contract following the date of bonus payment eligibility.  The applicant and the enlistment official authenticated this document with their signatures on 24 May 2005.  The record shows this document was added to the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) on 5 July 2005.  

3.  On 4 August 2005, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Annville, Pennsylvania Orders 216-02 show the applicant was ordered to active duty in the AGR program, effective 8 August 2005.  

4.  On 6 April 2010, the Deputy G-1, PAARNG issued the applicant a notice of indebtedness memorandum in which he informed the applicant he was indebted to the U.S. Government in the amount of $13,959.53.  He indicated the basis for the indebtedness was the termination of the applicant’s PSEB based on his acceptance of an AGR position prior to completing 6 months.  

5.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the NGB Chief, Education, Incentives, and Employment Division.  This official confirms the applicant did not serve the 6 months required to prevent recoupment of the PSEB upon his acceptance of an AGR position.  However, the facts he completed 5 of the 6 months and the 6-month requirement was eventually eliminated are mitigating circumstances which deserve consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. 

6.  On 19 July 2011, the applicant responded to the advisory opinion.  He indicated there are a few things he would like to say in his own behalf.  He claims the 4 March 2005 extension was forged and that he had signed and dated an extension in February 2005 and never received a copy.  He claims this would not be an issue if the documents were in his records because he would have known it was forged.  He claims when he entered the AGR program he processed through Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania and cleared the bonus and pay branch.  This problem was never mentioned.  He first heard of the problem in 2010 and began trying to clear the matter up.   



7.  Army Regulation 135-7 (Incentive Programs) prescribes policies and procedures for the administration of the Army National Guard (ARNGUS) and the USAR incentive programs.  Chapter 2-1- contains guidance on the Selected Reserve Incentive Program, USAR PSEB.  Paragraph 2-1.5 contains guidance on recoupment conditions and states recoupment of bonus payments will be started by the unit commander when entitlement to such incentive is terminated based on entry on active duty in the AGR program.  Recoupment for this reason was eliminated by an Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 Policy Memorandum, dated 14 August 2008.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that his bonus should not have been recouped has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  The applicant’s OMPF contains documents posted on 5 July 2005 which confirm he was aware of the recoupment provisions regarding his bonus when he completed the extension oath on 4 March 2005, and when he completed the bonus addendum on 24 May 2005.  Although the applicant claims the signature on these documents were forged, there is no evidence of record to corroborate this claim.  

3.  Further, given the documents were filed in his OMPF on 5 July 2005, prior to his acceptance of the AGR position, it is reasonable to presume if the documents did not contain his actual signature or if they were signed on his behalf without his knowledge, he would have raised the issue at the time.  Therefore, his argument that the documents in question were not in his record when he accepted the AGR position is not supported by the evidence.  Absent any evidence to corroborate his claims, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.  

4.  The fact that the requirement to recoup PSEB's based on acceptance of an AGR position was eliminated some 3 years after the applicant received the bonus is not sufficiently mitigating to support application of this standard in this case.  The applicant entered into an extension agreement and received the bonus under the terms established at the time and notwithstanding the recommendation of the NGB, there is no basis to relieve him of this responsibility based on a subsequent change to the policy.  



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)                                         AR20110002021



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110002021



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1