BOARD DATE:	  16 October 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120014770 


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 reinstatement of the Officer Accession Bonus (OAB) in the amount of $10,000.00.

2.  She states:

	a.  there are discrepancies regarding denial of payment of her OAB in the amount of $10,000.00.  There was whiteout on the original contract on the Service Representative line; there is no Service Representative signature or date entered into the bonus addendum; and she did not enter the date or unit address on the bonus addendum;

	b.  she was not at fault for the way her bonus contract was handled after she submitted the required documents.  She did not enter the date or unit address because she did not have all of her unit's information at the time;

	c.  she lost her Technician's job when she accepted her commission and she was relying on her bonus to get her through until she found a job; and

	d.  she did not have any intention to manipulate the system to be granted the bonus.  This bonus was offered as an incentive for completing the Officer Candidate School (OCS) and Basic Officer Leadership Course (BOLC).


3.  She provides:

* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 337 (Oaths of Office)
* DA Form 71 (Oath of Office – Military Personnel)
* NGB Special Orders Number 17 AR, dated 28 January 2011
* Written Agreement – Officer/Warrant OAB Agreement
* Two DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statement)
* Memorandum requesting an exception to policy (ETP) for bonus contract
* Memorandum with supporting documentation for incentives ETP
* Memorandum denying ETP
* Memorandum notifying her of the ETP result
* DA Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is currently serving in the New Mexico Army National Guard (NMARNG) in the rank of first lieutenant.

2.  Following a period of enlisted service in the NMARNG, the applicant was appointed in the NMARNG as a second lieutenant on 15 August 2010 and she was extended Federal recognition per NGB Special Orders Number 17 AR.

3.  In connection with her appointment in the NMARNG, she signed a Written Agreement – OAB Addendum wherein she agreed to serve in area of concentration (AOC) 92A as a critical skill in the ARNG under the Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) for a period of 6 years.  She did not indicate the unit and address or date of signature.  The addendum also shows she would receive the first and final payment of $10,000.00 upon completion of BOLC for the contracted critical skill.  The OAB Addendum does not include the signature of the Service Representative, but it does include a bonus control number of 010090013NM.

4.  She was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 13 March 2011.  At the completion of ADT, she was awarded AOC 91A (Maintenance and Munitions Materiel Officer).  She completed BOLC on 8 July 2011.  Her service record does not indicate she served in AOC 92A.  

6.  On 12 July 2011, she submitted a memorandum to the NMARNG requesting her commissioning bonus be resubmitted for review and approval.

7.  She provided a sworn statement, dated 21 March 2012, stating the graduates of her OCS Class 53-10 were eligible for a commissioning bonus in the amount of $10,000.00 or student loan repayment upon completion of BOLC.  She stated she submitted the required bonus paperwork through the OCS chain of command prior to the Education Office's deadline.  She checked the status of her commissioning bonus and found out the submission deadline was missed for her packet; therefore, the NGB did not approve the bonus.  On 8 July 2011, she completed BOLC as an Ordnance Officer and she continued to follow up with the Education Office to ensure her bonus contract was submitted to NGB for processing.  Copies of the original documents were resubmitted to the Education Office.  She also stated she has no knowledge of any changes and she did not request any adjustments to her original bonus contract paperwork.

8.  In a memorandum to NGB Incentives, subject:  Exception to Policy for Bonus Contract, dated 26 March 2012, the applicant requested the NGB honor and approve her bonus contract.  She stated she was not at fault for the error and had fulfilled her duties in the ARNG.

9.  She provided a sworn statement, dated 18 April 2012, from the G-3, NMARNG.  The G-3 stated he signed page 6 of the Officer/Warrant Officer Accession Agreement and had errantly signed in the section labeled "Typed or Printed Name/Rank Service Representative."  However, after creating the error, he did not use whiteout to correct his mistake.  During the time period in question, he was providing support to the Education and Bonus Office along with his assigned duties.  The G-3 also stated that in haste he neglected to date the document following his signature.

10.  The applicant was promoted to first lieutenant on 11 May 2012.

11.  In a 23 May 2012 memorandum, the Military Personnel Officer, NMARNG, requested the National Guard Incentives honor the bonus contract between the NMARNG and the applicant.  The memorandum indicated:

	a.  the applicant was in good standing with the NMARNG and she had satisfactorily fulfilled her requirements stated in the contract;

	b.  the SRIP, Officer Accession, 6-year bonus amount was $10,000.00; and

	c.  the issues that exist with the bonus are: (1)  whiteout on the original contract on the Service Representative line.  The former Educational Services Officer simply signed the wrong block, applied whiteout over the signature and re-signed in the Witnessing Officer block; (2)  there is no Service Representative signature or date entered on the bonus addendum; and (3)  the applicant did not enter the date or unit address on the bonus addendum.

12.  On 18 June 2012, the Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel/G1, ARNG, NGB sent a memorandum to the NMARNG, State Incentive Manager, denying an ETP for retention of the OAB for the applicant.  The State Incentive Manager will terminate the incentive without recoupment.  The memorandum states:

	a.  in accordance with ARNG SRIP Guidance 10-01 (effective 16 June 2010 – 31 June 2011), eligible applicants were offered the OAB;

	b.  the applicant accepted a commission in the NMARNG on 15 August 2010 for the OAB in critical AOC 92A (Quartermaster, General);

	c.  the applicant and the Witnessing Official failed to date the OAB addendum, and the Service Representative failed to sign and date it.  In addition, the bonus control number was requested on 30 September 2010.  Therefore, the intent of the Government to offer an incentive to the applicant on 15 August 2010 cannot be validated; and

	d.  the applicant may file a claim with the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, if there was belief that an error or injustice still exists.

13.  In a 27 June 2012 memorandum, the applicant was notified of the ETP request decision.

14.  Title 37, U.S. Code, section 308j(b), states the Secretary concerned may pay an accession bonus under this section to an eligible person who enters into an agreement with the Secretary to:  (a) accept an appointment as an officer in the Armed Forces and (b) to serve in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve in a skill designated for a period specified in the agreement.

15.  National Guard Regulation 600-7 (Selected Reserve Incentive Programs), paragraph 2-5, states bonus contracts are valid only with bonus control numbers which will be issued from the State Incentive Management Office to Military Entrance Processing Station counselors and reported to NGB on a monthly basis.  The State Incentive Manager will verify accession packets as prescribed by State policy for bonus control numbers, accuracy of contract and bonus addendum, critical skill and bonus unit eligibility, valid position vacancy, and required educational level.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for payment of the OAB in the amount of $10,000.00 was carefully considered.

2.  She signed a Written Agreement for an OAB at the time of her appointment in the NMARNG on 15 August 2010 in the amount of $10,000.00.  She agreed to serve in AOC 92A for a period of 6 years.  However, the evidence of record does not show she served in AOC 92A.  

3.  Although an ETP was requested, the request to pay OAB in the amount of $10,000.00 to the applicant was denied by NGB because the applicant and the Witnessing Official failed to date the OAB addendum, and the Service Representative failed to sign and date it.  

4.  Evidence shows the applicant did not fulfill the requirement of her Written Agreement for the OAB by serving in AOC 92A.  Therefore, there is no basis for paying her the OAB in the amount of $10,000.00.

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)                                         AR20120014770





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120014770



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1